Raceless Attack!

A play on words similar to a "fair assumption"?
But I allude to articles of "attack" or "dreams" and an alternative to "collision" that may be baseless.

In one fell swoop I have ruffled a few feathers or reversed the spin. Key words in new context can flip-flop a lot but there is a big difference between a change, of course, and progress. Just look what two words and two commas do. Let alone will. Not to mention the differences between u and I and making it us. The difference really does hinge on "you" and what we read or read into life.

[Oh what a dream we unweave.* Oh what a web we must weave. But not the web the old addage implies, but the web that reality needs. The web that determines what we will be.]

* I was going to use "To parse or not to parse", but technically this is a step below a play on grammar and even beyond a play on words. Fittingly this revolves around what we can b and r and I swear there was no irony intended let alone planned.

Clog Alert!

Not to Ribble, but regarding two points here:
The tenor of Bane Or. 
Rather than footnote, I will say Ctrl F "anachronism..." and scroll over "speaking of speakers"
Note to Editor(i.e. me): review dating 4mat. Chuck Todd, Today Show (R)

A. Norman Goldman comments on Boner.(I say Bane Or...)
B. The political parsing of wills and divided government, not to joke about punchlines or politicians and lawyers or bitter pills.

Further parse N later ...  [^]

^ not [exactly]
Review Saved in^^ Draft and Tangents.
^^ 12-31-12 [!] ?  w h ?

[C-The Cyle: "Stuck on Repeat"  RE/A+B "Amen Gov" (...) or E-Moat-Iconn?  i.e. "Boehner in a Bind?" /// F B D (S.E. Drift)^^^ or working with hope? and case studies!(patton lee adsurd?)/(Re:N-dell) (M.C.Time**) Not my comity of journalism]*

^^^ live drafting
*[1-4-13 e-N-f  / Re:Turn to C? i.e. inserting links now.(& later*)
** must review re:hope? & *

Obama Doctrine?

Allow me to remind you of ledership and the rhetorical. In my format I use it to refer to the heading of a piece as well as a peril to progress. Not that I have embedded the definition here, I have just googled these(2 links) now. But previously touched on it here. And no pun here. But here? I will parse these later, but for now I will claim that it is a position not just a doctrine. Hmmm, maybe doctrine is the word that sticks for some, and it is not partisan or bi-partisan. One important feature is that a policy is not an action, nor a result.

[My last two links which I inserted are on the"peril" of "progress" and refer to the nature of power and intelligence, in the area of freedom and the hard work involved. Just as previous wars were fought under an information embargo of sorts, I do not know if that is really part of the picture now, but whether it is or not, the information is part of the format that goes beyond just the military aspect, to the diplomatic and beyond and back again. Meaning who knows what information will be used to what end or who will use it, get it or misuse it.]

He said *a fowl*!

T-He He He He!

Lede[**] is pre-read of article.

P.S.* He said...she what? Ctrl F "incongruity"

*'n. P.R. (post-read) (O.W.)

[**] Editors note:(original saved in draft 3-2-13)
"Lede" replaces "Note", and to make a long G'Ribble short, my jest(or preemptive punchline) was Hume or Us? And to parse the pre-post-or-us, the asterisk was a play on my pre- & post- read of T-He article.  Original title: A Fowl[!]

Parsing Systems

P.S.  Are we Charlie?  Or why aren't we French? 
It is a shame that fame comes under such horrible circumstances.

Not to bury the lede in nuance or labels, but I intend to more heavily edit** insertion of links for the time being.  Unfortunately I may have now buried more nonsense*.  I am not Forbes, The Atlantic or Slate.  Not that I have placed then in any order of sense.  My point was to review any prior use elsewhere that I have yet to place in context~. 

*not that I have parsed the nonsense, be it the Daily Caller, the New York Times, David Brooks or any of their words.

** carefully filter

*~* I am not a Paper Bird! 
Je ne pax The String! 
Nor Car Tunist. 
R we all sat-irists?

RFD? ?[?]  Not to withdraw weapons.



1-13-15 The vig ? ** not fully read IRONY!

I am not Forbes ~!~  Context:  This is a difficult read.  Is it really necessary to disseminate examples to determine that the killings are not justified? Maybe we are more French than we might like[!]  Further context:  Images and cartoons in reaction to the massacre are not comparable to the images or cartoons that Charlie Hebdo publishes.  Not that I have avoided either, I just wished to review my m-beds.  i.e. links I have yet to parse or deconstruct
 
(Now, Romney? The Reid Report, pre-The Cycle. Un-parsed: -)

'N Doodle of sorts

Four Horsemen* of the Trickle Dow n.
And if you recall, I 4shade this on more than one 4' M.

[Cross Post? More parsing later, but data must always be viewed carefully and comprehensively. My hunch is that crime is going down for a few reasons connected the following. Density and Income, each of which could use there own Un(or 'N)hunching and Re:parsing. But I will suggest that it is probably something like, more expensive to live in a city and more efficient in respect to things(diversity?) [which] I may parse later.]
[Uncross post: This is for those who were with me on Saturday. The D'Ribble(hint) is March 2005, 'n "I'd search my blog" By George(Rx) you just may get it[!] ]

[7-12-11 'N aka "un"]
[7-20-11 Horsemen named, but maybe their horses.]

Post Election

88 Keys ! 
That is 44 x* 2 ?
The energy was amazing!
Now for cracking the code, or my Maddowian reference**(knock on wood), but I will leave it to Paul Harvey.  The rest of the story.  There is Romnesia and there is the Arithmatic. 
Something Too Point Oh?  Or Owe?  Two out of three be bad branches. 
Speaking of Maddow and the gang(Ed, Al, Lawrence, etc) I can only weave so much !  ***

* arrived late, left early, but got a pic with Norm, won a book, and booked. 
** it was noisy, I fumbled my words, but we R R now Beyond the Norm.
***  doe$ that dog hunt? (I had to parse my inserts carefully[!])
[Conn, Kennedy, Bane Or(Tan Gent)]
[Bottom Line: Mr. President! Begin with your budget^ and your jobs bill on the table, before any grand B.S. ]

^ You know, the one that Romney said was part of everything that you had your way. 

11-9-12 (update)  Xfinity #9



11-22-12 [C-VC]
12-7-12 update: [listening to AM1090 online,
the following pic scrolled by as the 1st of 5 from 88Keys.
FYI, later scroll expanded to 240 or so pics.]

Un Herd of Change

The Heard not the herd.
The unheard-of change.*
Mobilizing progressives and un-precedented change?

The president walked a line that is hard to parse but the two perspectives above might metric it. Inspiring the left and moving the moderates, I don't know if there is a precedence for a 14 to 20 per cent change in polls overnight. Of course there is precedence for news to leap on hypotheticals or rhetoricals anyway. The line was not exactly a leash but in line with our dog metaphor, the feat before us, and should tug at the character of our wagging or blue dogs. This is not our father's hush puppy or soul food.

[lines drawn]

[* Update 9-11-09: Unembedding the Victim Hood pulls the polls (CNN and MyDD) from the herd.]

Mess Age Monger

Reading between the lines.
See Draft,(now that is a tangent),
but I will skip the sign over cosign.
Or See Cant [!]
[Follow-up.]

Two Points Determine a Line.

Foot:Notes (!0

[Now I will parse the irony. The two points are Occupy Wall Street and the National Defense Appropriations Act. (Rebranding a SALT or SLAT**) Actually only one of these last links was the trigger for this line of thought. My point is about the lines as we make them. We are an exceptional country that is at risk of being more like those in the past. Congress is responsible for drawing the lines, and the judiciary and executive are responsible for interpreting and navigating them. Sorry there is no punch line, but that is the dilemma. Re-leads* and typos.

* my original intent was our foundation or 4mat not type ohs.
[The people must be heard, not a herd, let alone hurd.(ouch) It is an uphill job.]

Un-Seg-Way.
[** Strategic Argument Limitations Treaty or Strategic Lines Assault Tactics. Are you with M or again M? V4 VOTE! That is the spell/check of sorts.]

[Speaking of witch or spell checking...two notes of caution. I do not mean to make light of violence, food products or Occupy Wall Street. Or the Heck do I? But is there a line for satire or freedom?(Comity Central in mind.) And R we exceptional or the exception? And you rule!***

*** not original two notes of caution
[Not to mention: On the other hand, save the POST OFFICE and consider upgrading our constitutional links to include the internet. The internet is a post road. And congress legislates regarding commerce.]

[Follow up / un-M-beds]

[Speaking of Timing: Norman Goldman and Sasha. Redo taxes from the ground up. I did not catch enough to know if it was the same Sasha, but it is interesting that I had run across the connection, in follow-up. Not to mention Bill Maher on the question of taxes and class war and who is following [up] or being lead. And how prophetic in my lede and how I followed up in bold. Norman feels it is a misread of sorts. BTW: it is S. 1867 that has s. 1031 & 1032 respecting Amendment 1107.]

Location, location, location.

" Sources, sources, sources [!]" 
Not to parse ... nor tangent.

(FP1)*

* yet to post Footnotes Page One(June, '14)
Asterisk(1) pulled from b.s.@[!] (i.e. blog search) May the source BwU.

My original crack~ refers to references and sharing.  It is not conceivable that some could read all the material they** share on social networks.  To be less obtuse, there are sources read, sources cherry picked, and sources quilted. 
(to be continued)***
draft:
Bold = read 
italics=more to read
** Courier = at this juncture b. s. *
*** see labels
~ last insert
[On the matter of reading this...(not yet) but also see italic nor, yet recall D.D. Runes !]

[FP1 redate 6-14-14]

Reducks[!] in a row.

Independent comment

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

YBS/UBS*

Why Blog Search/You Blog Search**

TNN(Or technically not news.)***

*heading
**lede
***con/ text not news

[to parse / filter or JP Patches? See Labels]
[7-15-13 update bold the insert]

Why OWS is bigger than Left vs. Right.

Stuck in the game frame?
Bright Bart and Big Government?

Why OWS is bigger...

Tactically, what we'll see here will be a) people firmly on the traditional Democratic side claiming to speak for OWS, and b) people on the right-Republican side attempting to portray OWS as a puppet of well-known liberals and other Democratic interests.

Whine and G's?

On the Democratic side, we've already seen a lot of this behavior, particularly in the last week or so. Glenn Greenwald wrote about this a lot last week, talking about how Obama has already made it clear that he is "on the same side as the Wall Street protesters" and that the Democratic Party, through the DCCC (its House fundraising arm), has jumped into the fray by circulating a petition seeking 100,000 party supporters to affirm that "I stand with the Occupy Wall Street protests". (I wonder how firmly the DCCC was standing with OWS sentiment back when it was pushing for the bailouts and the repeal of Glass-Steagall Act).

Really?

What nobody is comfortable with is a movement in which virtually the entire spectrum of middle class and poor Americans is on the same page, railing against incestuous political and financial corruption on Wall Street and in Washington. The reality is that Occupy Wall Street and the millions of middle Americans who make up the Tea Party are natural allies and should be on the same page about most of the key issues, and that's a story our media won't want to or know how to handle.

Not your grandfather's "traditional".

This is an issue for the traditional "left" because it's a classic instance of overweening corporate power - but it's an issue for the traditional "right" because these same institutions are also the biggest welfare bums of all time, de facto wards of the state who sucked trillions of dollars of public treasure from the pockets of patriotic taxpayers from coast to coast

Really?

Both traditional constituencies want these companies off the public teat and back swimming on their own in the cruel seas of the free market, where they will inevitably be drowned in their corruption and greed, if they don't reform immediately. This is a major implicit complaint of the OWS protests and it should absolutely strike a nerve with Tea Partiers, many of whom were talking about some of the same things when they burst onto the scene a few years ago.

I have read Matt Taibbi's piece three times now over the course of parsing this, and I will let you read your own conclusions.

[Then I signed the petition at DCCC (see bold) "I stand..." with the following amendments.(see 3 links)]

[Each of the above blockquotes are directly from Matt Taibbi's piece, with the bold segues my comments. But the final Really?, "Both traditional constituencies want these companies off the public teat and back swimming on their own in the cruel seas of the free market, where they will inevitably be drowned in their corruption and greed, if they don't reform immediately." sounds a bit naive if not libertarian. Companies and Wall Street will not reform themselves any more than they will let themselves fail or let the market do its magic. But it is a matter of who's on board or overboard as well as some sort of tents.]
[Speaking of ironies, or Bright Bart and Big Government, just whose side is who on?]
[Meanwhile I have four posts to further parse. Starting with the big bite. @ 7 minutes 15 seconds in: Over two thirds of New Yorkers support Occupy Wall Street.]

[Oh what a web. No E.B. White:
SCroll up! Tol Keen? Rubric, Elements, what "October", Mis-attribute? Justice and/or sand witchbracket.]
[Alternative Reich? Not to pun on the furor, but is there an alternative?]
[A Democratic* strategist touched on something(on Martin Bashir) that has been embedded in my thoughts, and even more embedded in my writings. The Republican candidate will not come from the activist wing. And indeed the current leader often trails "anybody else". Well, they are not really polling that candidate, but the leaders are still struggling for less than a third of the Republican's votes(current Gallup Romney 20%). My point is that there just might be a compromise or coalition candidate. On the other hand... who am I to say democracy will prevail over the Republic?]
* 10-19-11 I have yet to find the proper link but place some others under Democratic Strategist and Martin Bashir.

"Can't Get There From Here"

OurFuture.org by Robert Borosage
Been there done that.
Re: Bottom link.
That is the only place to get from.
Here at least, and getting others there.
If this is loopy, yes.
But there is a lot of there there,
and not enough here here or is it hear?

My point being, there is a lot of fear from change, and facing it will change a lot. And that must be faced as well, as opposed to one fell swoop without the following and follow up. So in the words that others parse, there is hope it seems. While others seem to fear the seem and just rip.

[Or is there more here? I am not being too critical of the OurFuture.Org piece or too supportive of this TruthOut.Org piece from Christian Science Monitor, but in balance there is some chance for change. It hinges on the parsing of the words like nationalizing and the partnership and interdependence of the Treasury and the Federal Reserve for the sake of the economy(not to mention individuals and businesses) not just the markets.]

[UPDATE: We got this far: congratulations Huffington Post. (Sam Stein)]
[Not to mention Keith Olbmerman and Jonathan Alter confirming my analysis. "Necessary but not sufficient..." ]

[UPDATE 2-12-09: A Necessary Recovery Compromise ThinkProgress ]
[ALSO addressing Right Wing Fear Mongers: "Conservative Media Echo..."]

FOOTNOTES PAGE AUGUST 2013

Up Date: That's the ticket. 

8-2-13 The blank's the thing. A. Proxymoron?, # That is the ticket!, #?.(FP5) x. Killing Fields of Dreams, (y) Tea Party Down Grade, z. Congress- - to boldly go... ? 
8-2-13 1., 2. a., b., c., d(a), e.(We are at the table. ), f.(Update), g.House of Cards, h.  3. a. b.Killer Ad from Killer Group c.Take On The Hill! d. e.Post-Pyth F. G. h.I'm not saying... i. j. k. l. m. n. o. Just Say O! 4.MessAge 5.(Dime) a. Mmmm MOW, MOW, b.Tin Foil Herman, c. R.S.V.P.

8-4-13 VC, Vinyl Café, Vicious Cycle Virtuous Correction? Pun on VC or Victimizer Congress.
Perception Correction President(shall) Congress(shun)all?
8-5-13 : CePR? math/baker? Perception $knot Reality!

8-9-13 WAR (belated insert) Presently listening to Norman Goldman opening re: Rance Priebus and the Middle East. (5)mess+I-uh(b.s.), (7) format change, (13){Paper U?}, (21) NO!, (37) ! 

8-20-13 Back from Sekiu fishing trip, with dad, cousins, nephew and friends.
8-20-13 (a) [Aeschylus] & how buried

8-21-13 1 wiki(Miranda Warning), 2 (WSJ), 3 Trans Parent Seas, 4 Miranda Warning!, 5 The Guardian, 6 The Telegraph, 7 The Guardian(check redundancy)   Re: Oldsmobile (b.s.)

8-22-13:  That old hope and changey thing [!] (order of insert)  6 2 3 4 1 5 [7]
    (changey old hope and thing That [!]) Ribble this ? (FP2) 
8-23-13 bold added: not to Farce the Wor(l)d or parse SS oar well.
8-26-13: The (b.s.) of lemon ship is already inserted, with later untwist of mangled mixed meta for ... ?(FP2)
8-27-13 Not to pun on Too Bolds or W lines. (1 NOW, 2 The Cycle)
8-28-13 Hecuva post. (wMd?) Crtl F "spectrum" (a, b, g, i) See notes on original post and placement /timing of asterisks and links.  There is an M-bed within this FP.  But to cut the dimentionalism, there is more work. (d, w)

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.... ",)

Romney takes leap

of faith with religion speech
CNN Politics.com -/- Power Line

"I'm not going to be giving a JFK speech,"

-/-

"Freedom requires religion..."
"A President must serve only the common cause of the people of the United States."

"public domain"
"the religion of secularism"
"tHEy are wrong"

"trust"
"the equality of human kind"
"to serve"
"liberty"
"public square"
"under God"

"these convictions will indeed inform "

"constitutional order"
"free exercise"

"I'm not sure that we fully appreciate..."

Enough?

In John Adams’ words: 'We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion... Our constitution was made for a moral and religious people.'

I return to the quote he used. And note that the preceding words are all parsed from his speech. If you don't "trust" that, use control find (Ctrl "F") on your keyboard and screen for the words you choose to "verify". Rather than read between the lines, I will let you leap between the segments above and now I will do the same with the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence.

You will find "under God" in neither but you will find "God" is in the first paragraph of our Declaration of Independence.
Once and only there.

When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. -- That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, -- That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed...

I could "of course" cherry pick or parse more words, but it is all in the putting together. You might want to search other words like "creator" or "power" and you will find no more of the former and much of the latter and where, but this...

I will leave to you.

[Note: I have taken the liberty to italicize some words and some bold, and here note that a -/- (dash slash dash) gives separation between the sources and parsed words at the top of this post, while in the blockquote -- (two dashes) actually are each one long dash and are for emphasis it seems or high light.]
[It is not that it was a bad speech, but he is "no Kennedy" and may be a better "Reagan". But that is a double-edged comment. ]

The Interview

Strongly Parsed:- (President Obama's final comment on 60 Minutes)

And I think that anyone who would question that the perpetrator of mass murder on American soil didn't deserve what he got needs to have their head examined.

I could not parse more, nor do I imply con text. I mean that we can take this sentence as context enough(and with which I agree), yet we can and should question other's parsing and context for justice. [Pour Ridge Metaphor]

Updates: Head Fake or Syntax? Or childish banter. SIN: Shift, Ignore and Name call?

Parallel (Or Not So Pair o' Lax) Channels

[POST CONSTRUCTED 2-18-11]
Seriously from Media Matters with my spin.
Con-Text
2-9-11 A Generous Dia-Gnosis
- King of Rhetoric?
2-10-11 The Billy Club...
- The Club of Association
- Blank Network
2-11-11 Excitement in Egypt! [See Follow Up]
2-12-11 Bridging the English Channel
2-13-11 Frackin' Trickle Down
2-14-11 Said Relief?
- The Answering Machine...
- Fair and Balanced...
2-15-11 The Maze of Mace
2-16-11 Six-Edged Rhetoric
- Slash Segue
- Seconds
- Tip of the IceBurg
- Revisiting History
2-17-11 Recreating History
- The New Compendium

YES! THIS IS CON-TEXT TO A PARALLAX VIEW. and pun on the Billy Club and Blank Network to be named later.
The Pair o' Lax View* . I'm not just axing like Palin asks of Obama.

BUT THIS IS THE POINT!
The exchange between Glenn Beck and Bill O'Reilly actually makes both of them look better. It is the closest thing to two perspectives as might be found on FOX NEWS. Not that there is not a heckuva lot to pit and parse the cherries from the twigs, but there is something about the analysis(in the exchange) that may be not only valid but worth sorting and in respect to the audience about as much as they might be able to handle. That is not to say that it does not also serve as an inflammatory tool in a more nuanced way**.

* The Billy Maher/Elizabeth Hassel("Boy Billy")Beck Feud
** See BTW: Going Egypt...and Going Cheesehead

DECEMBER 2012 FOOTNOTES (fn) PAGE

[Begun 12-3-12.]

12-28-12 [ = (b.s.)pondering :
State of Politics
A Revolution? (scroll click)
Un-Exceptionalism (SC)
Punderous Ponderings (ibid) ] = /knot/ ( Try-unism ? ! ? )  ?
& (this is a test of sorts under the classification of filters/sources and progress)

12-22-12 Speaking of Will to Footnotes:(I will note the sequence of my link inserts{such})
Speaking of ge oh metric(or me trick) projects. (fn)GIGO(or MoJoe)
{ge oh metrics}
me
trick
projects
{speaking}(to be continued or Kantinued)

12-21-12 ^^ "paradox placement" anachronistically where the *ouch* was where the "pas" link is Treason of Imagery, with the "pax" link inserted retroactively, and lastly the "ouch" link inserted  All to pun(or parse) on pause, stiob and SignField)

12-20-12 By golly of sorts ^ (i.e. by google, by stiob)
Under the IS(^) is 5A, and here they Be ! (or R )

12-19-12 : Presidential Press Conference.
Links from bottom up.

"text"= (b.s. slippery=slope) a. Try Angle b. The Nature of Things^
 e.^ Flow of Conscience (a. thru s.)

"conn"(b.s. P+B+M+P) a. #1 Discipline - Philosophy ^^ b. The Tetrahedron Ramble* c. Looking Back, and Moving On. d.  Proof of Process? e. Geometry of Purpose f. Use of Labels g. Rachell Maddow Wants You! [talking points]  h. The Mess Age is the Message!

(1st)link: Presidential Press Conference
[pun on conn text: we have the conn!]

^ scroll over in-directly effective
^^ technically only a.^^^ works in scroll over
(i.e. rest link previous post)
^^^ except d. and f. for some reason


12-18-12 Perspectivism : a, b, c, d, e, f, g, h, i, j, k, l ?

12-18-12 "buying a stairway"  (POSTED 12-17-12) [under consideration]

12-5-12 Joke of the Year!
http://www.seattlepi.com/news/politics/article/Analysis-Obama-could-risk-going-over-cliff-4091855.php#ixzz2EC9tWNey
political = Contempt for Courage
leverage = Fiddle Sticks^
Ctrl F = Nail Meet F--C---[!] (Full Crumb?)
time = (b.s.) "will+expire" (FN)  ALSO Re:"time" will expire.

12-4-12 Pre-Pan FRY :
Original links pre-comment.
Why It's Hard to Replace the 'Fiscal Cliff' Metaphor.
asterisks.
[ read. ]
***  (kitchen)
[Post-comment]

12-4-12
The Place for Politics link that triggered my comment is not yet found.

12-2-12: as amended:
 ... Re:sources - not too pan or FRY.]
[...prE-links and post ponds.]
BTW: Is it better to fry two fish with one pan than kill or flip any birds or count bushes?
[Pre-C Hawks ?! ]

12-1-12 Links inserted. * Not too Die-jesting [!]
Washington Week
Facts...
algorithms
leverage
(rough issues/links)

12-3-12 Fiddle Sticks (hyperlinks included in pst as follows)
Boehner tells Geithner, ‘You can’t be
White House to GOP: It’s your move
“The Hobbit” is not a hipster!