Turning the page (On Humor)?

[For orginal post go here]
- - - - - - - - - - - -
(Seriously)

Not being a black man,
not being a white woman,
not being THAT old,
not being a vet
(of the battlefield), (1)
I must look back.

Well I may not really
have that much time.
But on the humor front, (2)
has a page been turned?
Have I spoken for others?
Sometimes I have borrowed perspectives,
and tried to put myself in other's shoes. (3)

But communications * - is a tricky field. (4)
And just as the above categories
represent perspectives on power,
if this has seemed like a dance,
(or flip-flop if you will)
it could be said, it is hard not to step on toes.
And maybe the best way of not tripping ***
is to bring a little lightness,
to what some see a burden
and others try to proudly carry. (5)

So I tread carefully now to note,
that the campaigns have represented
issues that involve race, gender, age and militancy
and there is hope that they have
vetted the world for the battles to come.

And speaking of vets, McCain** is an example of
blurring these lines, possibly to cross them.
No intended pun on the cross, but on humor
has he vetted himself of the age issue (6)
and used it as a weapon himself?
Weapon or tool,
are humor and associations,
instruments that we wish to have left behind?
OK, maybe I saw that coming,
but that is what too many say.

*originally: "humor", changed to "politics", then landed on "communications"
** I wrote this based on hearing portions of the speeches of Obama, Clinton and McCain. I would like to provide the links, but should note that McCain triggered the categorical humor-ism. Will that take me back to Kant?
*** "balancing" changed to "not tripping" to carry a metaphor on more levels
[note that as guideposts to editing, asterisks represent the sequence of changes]
[left behind: reading is much of what gets left behind, and I must confess not being a reader of that much of the material that I might touch on, but a hint or association may be worthy here --or not worthy-- profitable prophets.]
[Inspired Voter has two of the speeches, and is McCain in the foxhole?or dug in?]
[And finally (from where this started) I must excuse myself for my not being able to follow live the night's events and full context of the speeches, but I was myself in the trenches dealing with grass tips politics, and those that are experiencing what others just analyze.)

[this is the clutter I noted being added]
(1)footnote to other fields
(2)and this and more
(3) see middle link in particular
(4) trickle on
(5) or not (speaking of spelling) intended?
(6) this may be the final embedded version, I must now better filter the McCain speech that triggered this (these)Turning the Page(s); the humor and potential for change.

Turning the Page (2.0)

Turning the page (On Humor)?
[The following is the clean version(original)[*] : meaning I intend to clutter the above link]
(Seriously)
Not being a black man,
not being a white woman,
not being THAT old,
not being a vet
(of the battle field),
I must look back.

Well I may not really
have that much time.
But on the humor front,
has a page been turned?
Have I spoken for others?
Sometimes I have borrowed perspectives,
and tried to put myself in other's shoes.

But communications* is a tricky field.
And just as the above categories
represent perspectives on power,
if this has seemed like a dance,
(or flip-flop if you will)
it could be said, it is hard not to step on toes.
And maybe the best way of not tripping ***
is to bring a little lightness,
to what some see a burden
and others try to proudly carry.

So I tread carefully now to note,
that the campaigns have represented
issues that involve race, gender, age and militancy
and there is hope that they have
vetted the world for the battles to come.

And speaking of vets, McCain** is an example of
blurring these lines, possibly to cross them.
No intended pun on the cross, but on humor
has he vetted himself of the age issue and
used it as a weapon himself? Weapon or tool,
are humor and associations,
instruments that we wish to have left behind?- [*]OK, maybe I saw that coming,
but that is what too many say.

*originally: "humor", changed to "politics", then landed on "communications"
** I wrote this based on hearing portions of the speeches of Obama, Clinton and McCain. I would like to provide the links, but should note that McCain triggered the categorical humor-ism. Will that take me back to Kant?
*** "balancing" changed to "not tripping" to carry a metaphor on more levels
[note that as guideposts to editing, asterisks represent the sequence of changes]
[*] -left behind - reading is much of what gets left behind, and I must confess not being a reader of that much of the material that I might touch on, but a hint or association may be worthy here --or not worthy-- profitable prophets.]
[Inspired Voter has two of the speeches, and is McCain in the foxhole?or dug in?]
[And finally (from where this started) I must excuse myself for my not being able to follow live the night's events and full context of the speeches, but I was myself in the trenches dealing with grass tips politics, and those that are experiencing what others just analyze.)
[*] except for speech links

Censorship or just Business?

A belated comment on the firing of Mike Malloy:

Dear Mike:

Here is a comment I sent Air America Radio.

"Listening to Mike Malloy's last broadcast (August 25th) on Air America Radio, I am trying to determine if it was anything he said that lost him his job, assuming that maybe he crossed a line: However having listened up to the point that he came up with the bumper sticker WWYD?, [What would you do?] I feel that he actually was mellower than I had expected not being a regular, just due to the time slot.

I don't know if he foresaw his fate, or it is just financial, but I can accept that you are not necessarily in this for anything more than financial reasons. I just hope that that is the case and not some sort of displeasure with his message. His most extreme words cannot compare to the reality of this world, that must be challenged with reason or it will only be for force."

Having finished listening your (hopefully not) last program, there may be many places where you crossed a line, but as I said above and to a friend, compared to reality "there is no line". Well that is not exactly what I said, but I progress (as opposed to digress).

Now I can send you my improved well wishes.

Roger Out.

P.S. the above format is such as I had already shared this issue with a friend from Canada. In the overall lineup of Air America, you were not (necessarily) my favorite, but it may have just been your time slot (or being too similar in "sentiment"). After all the fine talents, it was usually just too much, to get jacked up all over again so late in the day, not wanting to cross any lines myself. But I must say, I really enjoyed your "last program" and look forward to wherever you end up.[italic words added now]

P.P.S. Listening again I get to the point where Bush says "there is no point in having a philosophical discussion" ? Appointing justices it was all about philosophy. Did anyone ask what was the philosophy? Not the media or the politicians. But we have leapt to the answers.

There was nothing...

necessarily prophetic meant with Third Time's the Charm. Or was there? It may have been the spin-off of either or and the likes of Beck and some evangelicals. Even just in the either or of "I'm just saying", which might be related to a silver lining, which only has three sides. There is the light, the dark and the actual cloud that matters. [SAVED IN DRAFT & CONTINUED & SUBMITTED 3-22-11) Third Times a Charm, means that if you look right, look left, cross the street, and there is a chicken already on the other side, you may have learned a lesson...or not. Not to be making light of recent tragedies, but that actually is the point. That nuclear energy is not on the same plane as air or traffic accidents. But back to the original point, that Third Times a Charm regards Toning Down the* Lines.

*Or were we?

[SUB-TEXT: the table and I Ron Knee.]
[Update: my original assessment before the air strikes began was that the President was following the letter of the law if not the spirit. I won't get into the spirit of the Patriot Act but is part of the law as well as the 1973 War Powers Act and the constitution. My point being that it is one thing to debate an action by the president, it is another to make a law determining or undermining his powers. Any reassessment will have to take into account the current politics as well as earlier circumstances not to mentiuon the politics then. It is that frame in which I am optimistic that change matters as well as who is in charge.]
[Footnote to power and politics not to mention economics.]
[Not exactly breaking, but one reason going to congress would not make sense. Would it make sense to make doing the right thing even more political? Would it make sense for journalists to be giving detailed intel to an enemy? The right thing being to save lives rather than waiting for a massacre. It can be wondered well why not other places, well then get some consensus, but some are in the past and others may be prevented in the future or nothing may change. And there may be a bonus feature[**] in this turkey on the table and that is the subject of war funding and the budget process or complacency.]
[**] 3-25-11 links added

Post-Turkey Day

RSN[11-25-11][12-1-11 Punchline? Spoiler Alert, do not click on Punchline, before reading full post.]
Krugman, connecting the dots,
Will Durst,
Relative Exceptionalism

Speaking of good dialogue and jokers and will. I met Will Durst at a Democratic function probably in 2004. I managed to catch him at a disadvantage, not intentionally but anything to get a word in. His hands were full or reaching for something in his pockets. Well maybe it was an advantage )IF[*]( you wanted to be prepared for a spit take, as he had an empty coffee cup in his mouth. So I tried out a joke that had come to me. "If corporations are people, where does the death penalty fit in?" So, he was polite or inconvenienced enough to laugh, if I recall correctly, with the cup still in his mouth.

Where do we go from here, the Turkey table? Well... have a good one[!]?

Post Game:
Stieglitz and Krugman new paradigm or paramorphology. Lexical creativity, texts and contexts.

Speaking of Turkeys or even the country[!] {t}=tangent slash criss cross or Relative Exceptionalism, or satire and witch[!]came first, the satire or the jihad? Thanks to Joseph Campbell...

Reader Supported News: The Sharia Turkey
The American Thinker: Happy Halal Thanksgiving
Rob McKenna
Literally in that order. The McKenna ad was found in the American Thinker link, which was in the RSN link, which was from TPMMuckraker. My original intent was to track the satire. Which came first the halal or the peta? Well more correctly in who was sat iring whom? I mean is this really along the lines of the war on Xmas? The FOX in the hen(turkey) house? I mean sat ire[!] at the table! No not IRE but pass the trip to fane.

Actually, I am trying to find something in common*. But I must check the history of halal** and the people for the ethical treatment of animals. The only point in common may be the freedom to choose, another brand, and that may be sharia. Am I carving the irony or just stuffing the turkey?

*Geller and PETA?
** Sharia and hunters: healthy treatment of food
[*] typo original is to IF.

Solutions or

Six of one, or three fifths of an other?
The ruling is 3 to 2 and I am glad I did not preemptively jump on Al Franken's RSN. There has been an issue made by the right or libertarian about freedom's forces, but my point is that the FCC is about a broad spectrum(pun on airwaves) but what it isn't the Commerce Department may be. In this regard the acuteness,(pun on funny thing happened on way to the angle) has to do with what is not on cable may take cellular form, but it is all business. i.e. traditionally if not erroneously, the FCC is about the so-called "public airwaves" what was radio and television are on to other formats or providers. If they can do with out transmitting or satelites, it is one thing, but if they need right of ways for ground links another, then there is the commerce itself, and if they could just not need to cross state lines... If nothing else is clear it should be the complexity that arises from not just our constitution but readings, not that this or the articles necessarily are... but works in progress.
[Speaking of progress or update(not)or [un-Swift segue] here is a concern: Are Social Security payments really dependent on the debt limit being raised? My point is that it is an interesting wrinkle in the charge that Social Security is not part of the so-called debt crisis, but it may be very important in the form you lie of the new congress and the table, no matter who has set it. i.e. is it too late to de-bait(or rebate) the lock box or reinvent the mouse trap?]

Out Foxed?

Obtuseness Redux.
Why does Social Security Need 174,000 bullets?
Dems open convention playing defense of Obama.
Get the lede out?

Not to bury any ironies or unintended puns...
The first two links are referenced in the next two lines.
The third line and two links are in regard to the heading, and to the sources.
The "Obtuseness Redux" were from Comcast/AP. 
But I first went local then tan gent or BaneOr BainOr... 
the punchline has to do with they nature of Infowars(the site), a bit more journalistic and fair and balanced than FOX, not that they do not require very careful reads.   The four links seem to represent a sort of unsorting and GPS un-crossroads dynamic. And for my part, the first aspect has to do with the irony of any whining about Social Security having an Inspector General division that hunts down fraud, in this age of second amendment fruit salad or T-parties. And for the sake of any intelligence briefs or geeks, "lede" is a journalistic term not a bullet point.  The last two links are a good un-cross Rhodes* of the left.  Not quite Tin-Foil Hats, not quite Coffee Party, but maybe close enough. (4 hard work?)

* not exactly
** ibid?
(See Labels, but I note here the original four:
DNC Convention, Infowars, Seattle PI, Social Security
(I know, [...] there is a local irony...)

[and global...]***

*** Re-verse asterisk of sorts. Emphasis on not read yet and irony. Heavy on the latter.
[For Rob Sake!]
[M-bed-ed?  Actually...]

Civil Disobedience...

I am not calling for it, but googled it, and found no mention of the current case, not that it might be called something else.

My one and only point(well...2 or three)is(R) that 1) those that partake actually have a line to cross, 2) they have consequences for crossing any lines, and 3) that government is also bound by such clarity.

Speaking of whatchamacallit...what is the flip flop of Civil Disobedience? Criminal Pathology(I mean following)?

[9-20-11 Update: Note Pathology Pun ]
[Not to mention ge oh me trick segue. BTW: It is a vision thing. No Burning Bush, but... "bad faith" v. good math Speaking of Highways: I originally mis-heard the president. I thought he said "It's MAD! Which is Bane or...see di-mentionism.]