Dimentionalism(sic)

[sic] is another tangent or dimensionalism [!]
Dimentions?
Two* Points.

*fore, six, eight

[Charts and Images]
Uncoining (sp!), will utilized (sic) or [sic] or [!]
Speaking of blocks, inside or outside...


SEGUE, my points here for further consideration:
The future of Occupy: Four key questions
Super Committee/Progressive Breakfast
Leaning Forward?

Weak in Review[!](Morning Joe)

IN PROGRESS:
Star Chanber
Para-Model
Martin Bashir and GUESTS.

Jonathan Alter and David Corn share their perspectivism of the 2012 GOP crop. What caught me was the "process of elimination" crack by the former.

Yet to insert or finish.
SEGUE TWO: The Platonic Cultural Model of the Tetrahedron given quantum form. Politics is about power and culture, but the latter may be the point. Politics may be the 4th dimensions of the phsyical, mental and emotional realities. What is the point" Who decides? And back again. I am not yet ready to overlay a tetrahedron, but it seems that the military represents an element like math, or a structure like religion and economics. It is a tool, and a force, not that religion, economics and goverment aren't. It may be seen that government is a hinge point, where there may be more politics in anarchy than tyranny. Part of this new connection(military) is thanks to the service of a soldier to which I give thanks again. His service was also in the slippery slope of rhetoric where the issue was who guards the "gates of American Democracy", which ironically spun out of control over the Obama/Jobs issue. There seemed a lack of appreciation or understanding of the jobs of the three branches of goverment and the relationship to defending it. The military certainly defends our security, but as for our rights, if they(our rights) were not used, they would be lost, and then what would they be fighting for? And if they were not used freely, they might be fighting for nothing more than what other countries are fighting for. But who am I to say who might understand that?

The Bully...

Poor Pit. Not to pull my R's upon my return from Japan, it does seem odd though, for billionaires(and corporations) for free speech not wanting their names known for fear of bullying. The pity is in the pendulum of victim hoods. Not to mention[*] the other slap shot at robustness.

[*]10-14-10 My sarcasm might be too subtle here, in that the Poor link(above) on Taleb's Robustness may be a slightly slanted perspective of economics from the business perspective. The Business Insider might be no more than a blog or astro bagger in terms of its criticism or incomprehesion of Taleb's theories. Taleb online The New Yorker under my usual meanderings. I would also suggest whether Bernanke has read Taleb or not, he should explain that there has not been a replacement for Keynesian economics, and that the government has a role to play or the balance will continue to teeter for the moneyed rather than the purposeful. On the other hand this may just be an incompresible way of saying that unless Taleb is understood and improved upon, we can suffice with continued tinkering as long as it is with purpose and for the people. Unfortunately this may be a bigger task than understanding Taleb. What I allude or have links here to, are the international and comprehensive nature of economics evolution. And simply put, the economy must not fall off the wall, but work on the wall must be comprehensive if not wholistic. If I may reiterate my tetrahedron of physics, psychology, philosophy and politics ofor purpose. The pinnacle of the project is the purpose of the structure and the process that works whatever is intended** to work.

** And I have not intentionally left "we" out of this, but it puts politics, religion and economics as part of the process not the purpose, or the be all and end all, intended or not.
[At the risk of further incomprehensiveness, I suggest that the administration is doing what it can short of a complete replacement of Keynesian economics, otherwise know as my Egg/Wall metaphor, while Taleb's approach may be just the thing as a goal. There are natural laws, and they must be worked with or they will be against us all. See tetrahedron not theology.]

Irony versus Hypocrisy

Smackdown: Shuster Nails Ari Fleischer over GOP Hypocrisy
Shuster gives as good as he takes, but the irony is that Fleischer is there arguing over the childishness of Obama when Rush is not elected by the people, and neither is he. So the Catch 44 is that if Obama is wrong for painting the Republicans with a Rush Brush, then MSNBC is wrong for presenting unelected spokespeople for the Republicans, however it is the nature of the media to try to present both sides, and the nature of the Republicans to use Joe the Plumbers.
Speaking of plumbers and whose job it is...
Several links having filtered through my email box unprofessionally*
bridge the spectrum and filling the bill.

I will not unembed the threads but leap to the next field so to speak.

A more selective approach browsing the TED forum, a spin on the technology of politics and religion by Noah Feldman presents a preemptive perspective on hope. Having viewed less than two minutes, I noted before logging out, the following:(Unmodified but for one dash)
The third leg if not noted here is Economics and the Point is Justice or the fulcrum the Law. Values and their management is the key. Balancing the tetrahedron of flip-flop so to speak. The hour glass of consumption or conservation. Economics Politics Religion Law for the People - Executive, Legislative, Judiciary for the people and the point of balance.

I had my own preemptive concerns which need to be upgraded [3-6-09]and revisited, but how does this connect to the above?(a pun on hierarchy?) Facing choices and nemeses, not to mention the connection to things being in their place, whether fields or technologies and who uses what or whom and for what. Further search may dig up a reference to direct cause ofor[***] systems.

But prepost I read: Staving Off a Great Depression by Dean Baker The Guardian UK and where does this fit? In the fear or faith options; or fight or flight, excuse or blame sections. But I propose that the numbers game be given international scope[Update **].
[UPDATE 3-20-09: The following section remains in its original form but for bold. See BINGO which follows to where it relates to the nature of preemption.]
The honesty of the new budget and accounting now includes the war on terror which was not on the books. So rather than the declare a win or lose the economy bifurcation, the new accounting must include the soft power ingredients that do not come free. I have not seen where this is said, but it should and probably has been or will be.
[BINGO! or rather none other than Warren Buffet gets it.]

*i.e. by friendly nemesies however undivinely.

** Update International Scope and a new link at revisited: "Panarin insisted he didn't wish for a U.S. collapse, but he predicted Russia and China would emerge from the economic turmoil stronger and said the two nations should work together, even to create a new currency to replace the U.S. dollar." This guy may be the Rush of Russia but he could be on the same page as Putin, while I feel that economics may be the bailiwick of the Rumpole. "She who must be obeyed" and changed.

*** ofor: metaphysical synergistic concatenation

F'N 3

Update Labels.
My Images: Review of Recent
Gitmo or less.(HeGel Try Angle), 

 

Ear Rock, Ear Ron,(Subjective/Objective d'ow) 

Change Logos (RYGB)DeltaLogos(Economics, Hume, Or us, Politics)

Ghost Busters (4TetraHedrons)
Speculative Physics (Original 4-sided-die.)(Not my Maslow)
Wittgenstein (Secondary Die?)

Secondary Edgy's 
The Physics of the DOW
Rough Philosophy (Venn History)
On any given day? 3Models(Environment)~
A Place To Ponder 3Models(Environment)~
Bricks and stones (Politics, Economics, Religion, Culture)~

*

Pre-Capitalization

(fn)TOO Point OH[!] (Politics, Economics, Religion, Culture)~

~
* uncertain of origional insert (found in image archive)
Feels Like Tetra Spirit [!]

Meta World

Peace Out!

The Lost Obama.
[under construction: there is more to the DBA.]

No, this is not a parting shot. But it is a crack or google at DBA.
I really should not make light of crack pots.



"by crack/key" [!]

Hint: Have your scroll on or click on.

[New MO(or no mo']
[Mo bama Slash Oh-ba-ma]

[Index A and B in progress, Oh Ba Ma ? Irons in the fire, without ironies. Not so fast.

My point of this taxing tangent is the GeOhMeTry* of escalation or not sum game.]
A hint is sometimes in the scroll, over.

[Posted today: This is A, B, C and D. Under D and team[!] there is Will Time.]
[The Process?]
* my pinnacle or bubble theory in regards to Politics, Religion, Economics, and Foreign Relations (more specifically, the values dynamics)

The Be All and End All?

NOT[!] *
Nor,
Neither.

Not to trammel up the consequences,
but "Peace is hard work"
and so are economics and progress.
Not to catch up on the gaming metaphor either.

(See Tax Plan and "Fiscal Terrorism")
Not to mention actual tables.

[ T. O. W.]
Politics ---> Economics, Government, Religion (Values)
Philosophy -
Psychology -
Physics ---> Math, Meaning, Forces(Ge Oh Me Try)***

Leaving aside the dynamics of philosophy and psychology, the internal and external dynamics of thoughts and feelings should be noted.
Also note difference between theories and models,
not to mention** formulay.

* note irony puncutation [!] in regard to the INET dicussion of models in the context of "Moneyball" and the Bard.(next two links) But more importantly in the context of the Platonic system, which I call the Tetrahedron of Will(TOW).
** Or KOW TOW
*** not just to pun but physics is the base and politics the pinnacle in this GPS of whose will and what will happen.

[Update: 7-10-13 hilites added also labels(INET/The Last Word)

Economics...

is no more the vehicle of our values than religion or politics. But politics is the more fair and balanced of the three as long as none of the three dominate the message, four they will. The s'um is great than the duoh!

[Subtext or Con Text?]
A thought divided against itself.
[Field theory or spare the Rodney? ...speaking of Homer]
[Vector valuing dynamics]

Memorial Day

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

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

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

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

Natural Right and History

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

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

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

Clause Wits

...war is politics by other means
I'm sorry... someone*** has made a point of my tangents. But it might be Germane*, or was he Austrian. No.. Prussian and Hegelian.
Could it not be said that economics has been the same, politics by other means?
What about religion?** Is that a valid spin?

*intended spelling
** in an evolutionary sense

[See update paradox of congress regarding line item veto]

*** also bowing to someone I include a definition from spin link:

Clausewitz’s trinity comprises three specific elements. The identity of those elements is readily evident to anyone who actually reads the first paragraph of his description: It is "composed of primordial violence, hatred, and enmity, which are to be regarded as a blind natural force; of the play of chance and probability within which the creative spirit is free to roam; and of its element of subordination, as an instrument of policy, which makes it subject to reason...." (emphasis added). This set of elements is usually labeled "emotion/chance/reason"; sometimes "violence/chance & probability/rational calculation"; or, even more abstractly, "irrationality/nonrationality/rationality."

It would seem that this creates our reality as opposed to an original intent begetting results, let alone values. Oh, but I guess it does. But some just have a different ge oh me try.
[12-15-10 Speaking of timing or tangents(footnote)the original purpose of my blog was to record such leaps, not always capable of recording their inspiration.]
[In the above footnote I succeeded in not loosing that inspiration, though it was close, but we have lost a very important piece in our power portfolio in Richard Holbrooke, may he rest in peace.]

SinCronyCity

or the Un-Try-Pod?

Well, not exactly.

The Un-Pun?

Just in case there is any question, I love humor and a lot of other things.
But this* is serious.

The original inspiration was a missing link, in regards to an article on a potential Fed Stimulus or QE3, which I had printed out and carried around before misplacing(unless I have embedded it somewhere) associated with the Krugman's Bernanke's Perry Problem in the New York Times with the synchronicity triggered by the Brian Morton piece.(a link on the same virtual page) Not that I believe there are any acausal events, especially in** economics, politics or religion.

*not the point but see bold links
** update charts label
[Oh what a mug we weave...

Fed's Ben Bernanke opens door to further economic stimulusFederal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke tells Congress that he expects no quick improvement in the weak job market, and says the central bank is prepared to take steps to aid the economy if necessary. But he suggests nothing is imminent.

...not to dis Krugman but discuss Perry.]

[No synchronicity? Robert Reich*** on Martin Bashir.]
*** link not there yet (OK NOW) [Not to mention: Dylan Ratigan on Social Media Trending Dangerously [8-31-11 link found], Bingo on Hardball, with Eugene Robinson, and retro Last Word. But actually while I am waiting, the president's jobs plan will probably be more of the same, and it should be, more of everything he compromised on and the Republicans blocked.]

[Charts Label Updated back thru 2011]

[8-31-11 Label Institute for New Economic Thinking]

The Tetrahedron Ramble*

What the heck** is the point? I revisit my Power Broker Mountain Project, or actually move on. What I call the prime disciplines as in fields of study, Physics, Psychology, and Philosophy form the base with Progress or their result as the point of their projection or application forming a reality or culture, as we know it, or think we know it, or feel we apply it, regardless.

The perspective that caused me to reconsider this model, or concept (as it also may be the perspective) is a proposition that Science, Religion, Politics, and Economics,(structures) have at least three things in common: Values, Ideology, and Power.(VIP) Now I don't want to be restricted to the math or geometry or insistence that there is meaning in them for some sake other than they are structures. But conceptually they are at the point of the tetrahedron and not the point of the tetrahedron any more than culture. Now to some this may have gotten nowhere, but we will get somewhere, with or without consideration of VIP and the Very Important Point of who and what we are or will become.

Is it no coincidence that there are three branches of the government, Legislative, Executive and Judiciary based on the constitution and the preamble, or that the first 10 amendments are called the Bill of Rights? Freedom and Justice are not forces to reckon*** with, but create.

*somewhat impromptu
** search fuzzy math and English; not to mention viscious cycle or golden rule
*** "bottom line"

New Approaches?

New Intelligence Estimate New York Times
New Approach to Terrorism Associated Press
CUT FUNDS means RAISED TAXES
Unless we consider the war won,
state and local taxes must cover the cuts.
[There is still something to be said
about the [Act to]PVRHT
and Pre-Empting Crimes] *

Much may be due about nothing.
But it is the grey areas or
"in the shadows" where they operate.

Another benign bill, but in conjunction with The Patriot Act, and failure to follow FISA or II and over 750 Presidential signing statements, do we really need more bills that will be followed at the whim of the administration? But it really is in the definitions and the intentions which are pre-emptive and likely pre-empted by intentions.

* LINK RECAP:
11-10-07 Alicia Mundy Seattle Times Washington Bureau
11-1-07 Chip Berlet quoted in this piece. In These Times
The long and the short of it?
Slate 11-27-07 ThruthOut 11-29-07

FURTHER COMMENT: Senate Bill 1959 has made strides in one area only since the House version, H.R. 1955 and that is the balance of the committee appointments, but what about the fields that will be covered, and the collections of material and the following of laws. The following is a crack at a critique of this attempt (S. 1959) to make up for the poor performance of the administration and congress in the areas of accountability:

While many disciplines and departments are involved there are three primary fields that make up the dynamics of individuals in society, and those are the Physical, Psychological, and Philosophical, and the fourth is represented by the dynamics which is about the people and their goals and that is Politics. These are the areas that need work in society before we can hope to prevent let alone predict people who will take thoughts and feelings into actions. But some of the circumstances that one guest listed as contributors to radicalization are the lack of issues being addressed by society, issues that could be said to cause violent radicalization. Issues which are just the ones that Republicans refuse to address, and Democrats just barely stand up for. Those being basic needs and government accountability

.

Others may look at the fourth dimension of this world view and think economics, religion or spirituality, but what are these all but the power of working with others.

CAD (2 out of 3 be bad)

May Day ain't what it used to be.
Cads are what they will be.
CAD used to stand for Computer Aided Design.
Fore! To correct the swing of sorts.

I recently referred to Ted Nugent as having CAD, Cause Affect Deficiency or Disorder, along with Mitt Romney.   And since it is all about the defining issues of our time, or the 2012 election, the ideal flip-flop from Cause Affect Disorder is Culturally Aided  Design.  If fact I feel that the Jonathan Haidt book, The Righteous Mind may be enlightening to read, but I believe it has some imbalances.

Why does he pick the categories he does to distinguish liberals from conservatives?  Why is having them balanced better than in some hierarchy?  Why should we look to the sacred, and wouldn't the rest follow of sorts?  SEGUE
If moral psychology is the foundation for politics and religion, what is the foundation of economics?  Or physics and philosophy?

Now I know I am avoiding comment on the May Day issues**, but in the greater scheme of things, there may be a related point to do so.  While I have yet to get the book, I have perused more than once most of the links in the previous paragraph(pre-segue).  Not that they may be inserted only slightly more than haphazardly.  In my lede, I have hinted that to be a CAD is not always bad, but sometimes it is just*** a tool*.

*BTW:  it was more than just for convenience that I used affect over effect.
** 5-2-12
***5-3-12 "CAD" and "just" links are not endorsements of confrontation without consequences.  Violence and destruction must not be condoned.  Anarchists should be seen as part of the 1%. (Hijacking the message, much as the Tea-party had their's hijacked by the Koch bothers.)  I might add that globalization, capitalism and even cap and trade, are not the problems or solutions^.  It is the entitlements of the 1% in their hyperbola of fantasy.  The only difference between anarchists and libertarians is the fantasy.  Not that anarchists are more real, at least they realize that their is something about the foundations over the fountainhead.

[5-4-12 On the globalization front.]