Mocumentary: Expelled (Exposed?)

Featured DO NOT SEE!
Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed. *

Idol Chatter: Pre-Screaming.
Reuters: No "Intelligence" evident in Stein documentary Post comment.
Angry Astronomer reports.

An unwilling participant!
And a Willing participant?

* OK, see the trailer, which is admittedly more a mocumentary.

[Now I will add my only little discourse:

Fear Based Blame Game

Speaking of Labeling, I did not know I would go here. It is not a matter of Faith. It is a matter of evidence. Not that faith is wrong to have. But it must be based on evidence. Of course there is evidence for faith. But can you question faith? You can question evidence. But would you have faith in unquestioned evidence? Evidence can give you an answer, if you have a question. If you have faith in unquestioned evidence, can you question faith? If it is a matter of freedom, would anyone choose freedom from evidence? Would anyone choose freedom from faith?

Of course this is just a ramble. Unless one chooses to answer, whether you have faith in evidence or no evidence. Would anyone base their answers on a writer, actor, economist, lawyer? Just because a dog does not all of a sudden become a cat, does not mean that things don’t change, and not always for the better. But apparently with intelligent design, anyone can be anything, no matter their department or intelligence. There is now evidence for that.]

[[If the above ramble is hard to follow, maybe reading the following will help.
The Information Challenge by Richard Dawkins -- Maybe not, but it may make it seem easier. (It may also be helpful to point out that this is only an example used by unwilling participant above.) ]]

[04-22-08: more links on Expelled - -
PZ Meyers Expelled, Gains Sainthood -
Lying for Jesus - (nfry)

It is one of the classic philosophical fallacies to derive an 'ought' from an 'is'. Stein (or whoever wrote his script for him) is implying that Hitler committed that fallacy with respect to Darwinism. If we look at more recent history, the closest representatives you'll find to Darwinian politics are uncompassionate conservatives like Margaret Thatcher, George W Bush, or Ben Stein's own hero, Richard Nixon. Maybe all these people, along with the Social Darwinists from Herbert Spencer to John D Rockefeller, committed the is/ought fallacy and justified their unpleasant social views by invoking garbled Darwinism. Anyone who thinks that has any bearing whatsoever on the truth or falsity of Darwin's theory of evolution is either an unreasoning fool or a cynical manipulator of unreasoning fools. I will not speculate as to which category includes Ben Stein and Mark Mathis.

Faith in doubt and inquiry -
Related video link:
'New' American Theology of Civil Submission - ]

Incredible Wittgenstein?

Incredible Wit-gen-stein

Wit:  The obvious and the persona

Gen:  generate - generation 

Stein: the vessel and the persona

So good so far.  To be edited later. 

Facebook Town Hall (amended)

[originally tacked on to previous post]
[SEGUE: amendment written after a District Democratic meeting and get together(see footnote.)]

[...I note here an additional gripe from Sam Stein (for continuity sake, Sam Stein is writing about the Fiscal Speech not the Facebook Town Hall]:

Several members of Congress also expressed agitation with the timing. Obama’s speech came after Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wisc.) unveiled his own budget plan, giving his own remarks the veneer of a presidential response rather than executive leadership.

Well, excuuuuuse me! But the President came out with his 2012 Budget proposal almost two months before the Ryan budget. But one hanging chad here is that the context of the debt is not just about the good economic times under lower taxes(which is shakey) but that there was excessive borrowing and spending that helped the economy. It was not so much tax and spend Liberals, but war and borrow and spend and bailout Conservatives. Which merits a further comparison from the Facebook Town Hall (transcript) :(President Obama)

Because this recession came at a time when we were already deeply in debt and it made the debt worse, if we don’t have a serious plan to tackle the debt and the deficit, that could actually end up being a bigger drag on the economy than anything else. If the markets start feeling that we’re not serious about the problem, and if you start seeing investors feel uncertain about the future, then they could pull back right at the time when the economy is taking off.

So you’re right that it’s tricky. Folks around here are used to the hills in San Francisco, and you’ve driven -- I don’t know if they still have clutch cars around here. Anybody every driven a clutch car? (Laughter.) I mean, you got to sort of tap and -- well, that’s sort of what we faced in terms of the economy, right? We got to hit the accelerator, but we’ve got to also make sure that we don’t gun it; we can’t let the car slip backwards. And so what we’re trying to do then is put together a debt and deficit plan that doesn’t slash spending so drastically that we can’t still make investments in education, that we can’t still make investments in infrastructure -- all of which would help the economy grow.

Then there is Speaker Boehner:

Boehner, R-Ohio, said the biggest accomplishment of the Republican House this year has been to change the debate on spending -- and the budget compromise sets the stage for even bigger cuts. "It's like driving down the highway and throwing your car into reverse," Boehner said.

Which should complete the "who is in the driver's seat" metaphor.

[Footnote: In late night discussions, I brought up George Lakoff and in response, Systems Thinking was mentioned, and here is an article, which I may have already ran across in other form(Under Supported*). And yes it is similar to my Tetrahedron of Will, not that having dimentions alone denotes similarity.

[Speaking of parallels or tangents, I just missed a bit on Thom Hartmann reviewing Atlas Shrugged**.

* And apologies to my education and not yet having not fully reading the link, but I did study Systems Theory in Organizational Behavior.

** Ayn Rand

Hump Day?

To Re:view Page:
Original intent to retrace the War on Hillary[!] links.
Under RE:VIEWING we find: File for Facebook.(but that is a tangent)
So back to 12-2-14.  We find Culture*. Below that we find OW [!]
Then (FP1) parses the Greek. Under which I find a new anamoly.** [A Witt gen stein?]
Within FP! we have (FP2)
Under post-pyth we have more on Hillary.  Prior threads and Pythagorean work on the way.
That's the ticket. C. bad+press Other Greeks*** to Countdown. or un-Vienna Circle?
The Calculus of DOW or coneheads? (Jung, Euclid, Barlow), (Newton Liebniz Asimov), Dar Tan Ya?

But back to the parsing or back from the tangent.
~~~~
(FP1)
~~~~
 (Liebniz Dar Ching)
There is no plausible metaphilosophy. All is metaphysics. 
Wittgenstein/NewLieb/TOW: words, math, subjective  /* objective Larouche / Rand?

Manual Blog Search: Not Just ... a Pen Chant 4 Geo Metrics.
Exceptionalism and the Slippery Slope , I.Q.* (draft) , Gitmo or less. ,
 Reading In Progress[***], Full Read! ?,  Hume or boo , F'N 3
[Need to review labeling of photos, images, cartoons etc]

Is the rational, math or language? 
Is subjective/objective the real ManyKey'nIsm or classical economics?
C-Shelley ? Or pre- stein.

*asterisk in original (* R.I.P.)
** leave as anamoly of [scroll over unclickable]
***  need to adjust way point(that's the ticket)

(FN!) : Starting with the last insert.(*-5) = mics? in regards to the meta-plausible.
(*-9)@ ManyKey'nIsm we (b.s.)Tryunism for 3 links in 2 posts.
A bit more anachronistic(*-1) we are Frank 'n pre-cast[!] 'n loosing the thread with C-Shelley ?
Or Shilling Schiller [!] 

Four Models(~):

 

(~) models : Milo Mulligan / The message is the mess.  (~) Para-model

Penta-meta point ?
Geo-metrics [!] ? (~)





 /*  : (2-4-14) [ / ]=subjective+objective:(b.s.) link inserted also two selected from(fp3)

Logical Track it Us[!]

or Witt gen Stein ...
or stone is half full?
or cast empty.*

* spoiler alert! REALLY, be sure to watch Stone is half full first, as later work has different perspective than TLP.

Stone is have full: Preface to TLP
Perspective: The Plausibility of Wittgenstein's Metaphilosophy.
than Aphorisms
TLP the work.
Poetic License ? K? H?(fp?)

McCain camp sexist.

Sarcasm? (see video)
No- perfect rhetoric.
[If you can't stand the heat...]
I don't know about Sam Stein's comment, but Ed Schultz's callers thought Campbell Brown was being sarcastic? Could be, but that only misses who it is aimed at. Ed and I take it serious. Maybe I missed where Ed is lost, but the Palin selection is no Joke. The point is that sexism is their defense for their offense. It is great that she is a woman. But if she were a man, her policies would be the point where we would have issues. Meanwhile she (the Maverick) is being trained in the same old politics. Oops, now I have trampled into agism. But referenced back to training and issues should bring to mind Reagan not to mention Nixon handlers, by way of Bush and Rove.

Forget about Truman and his "get out of the kitchen" metaphor: they can't even stand the sarcasm, let alone the media.
[get out of the sarcasm...]
[But it remains to be seen when she does face the media, will she be prepared or just polished and the media still the battered significant other.]

A Funny Thing Happened...

On the Way to the Republic.

This thread was triggered by something Mike Papantonio said, sitting in for Ed Schultz on the Ed Schultz(radio) Show. The trigger is now lost, but it may have been the follow-up to the Class War or as some say, Culture War.

Randi Rhodes is not the funny thing. But I hope to find the serious thing she read on tonights show. But it might better play out on The Last Word with Sam Stein about triggers. [Guy Faux?]
[Allow me to recap: week before last, the president held his joint session on the American Jobs Act, followed last week by his method of payment, followed this week by his long term plans. To sum it up, basically he said, there are 14 months left before the election, let's get something done. The Republicans basically said no way. So instead of bring it on, IT IS ON! BTW: I missed this, but that is for the afore mentioned editing(which I edited).]

Frank Knight

Ben Stein noted this in an NCAA pregame commercial. Too bad I forgot what it was for, unless it was a public service message, and too bad the Washington Huskies lost in a squeaker that may have hung on a bad call by the refs. Now back to ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ.

Oops,
My Bad. Actually [*]...
they may be right, but not necessarily to the extent[**] they believe. Ten hours of sleep per night? But who knows?
[And in memory of the Triangle Shirtwaist fire.]

[*] 3-21-11: links re-figured with bold and links here added, plus Oops realigned.
[**] note by association

Ghosh Darn

For Sail?  Dreams. 
Un-Roar Shack?
:::
Gnosh Dim Sum?

(FP$)
[Freudian Ship[?]  O. W.?]
The;;; ... Luminist/Roar Shack(Lob Stir)
Un-Ravel Stein ?

FOOTNOTES PAGE ONE SEPTEMBER 2014

Footnotes Page
in draft*
-

*(b.s.)=blog search
-
Re:labels & other blog spots.

A K A / August missing Footnotes Page
Categorical Empiricists ?**
-

** CAD (To be or not 3d) ?






9-9-14 Original Intent or in tent
(AM IT: [tan gent(~)] Andrea Mitchell ISIS Threat /-/ Witt Gen Stein/Jihadist  Defeating IS IS?
This is not to pun or purge, but to more carefully review later, the word.)


{Stop.} At this point, I will change the heading of this link from #(9-3-14) to "FOOTNOTES PAGE ONE SEPTEMBER 2014"\
-
9-9-14{nexus}
PIT Spot? 1.  T= A. PIT Schtick, B. Clause Wits (3.0)?, C. There is no Savior, :D, E: Three Clauses for ...  [any body love Rice?  Ronan Farrow Daily?]
2. Spoiler Alert? Not yet M-bed ed.
3. C-O.I.? = A.Original Intent?, B. GOP Plan to Hurt Economy, C. The Exit Strategy, D~?.  vOO due: vCR, E. Where everyone needs to read..., F. Table of Contents, G. Health Care Summit, H. Progressive Poll  I. What are the Frackin' Odds..., J.Happy Earth Day!, K.Try Angle,  L. Mess Age Monger,  M. Post-Turkey Day,  N. Nadir, O. Clause Wits, P. Romer Resigns,  Q. Go Purple!,   R. Give an inch..., S. Temporal, T. Back to "The One Thing?". @  {(~)} Future Bubble?


~: OH REALLY FOG / Catch-44
4loreMat[?]: labels 3~ NFRY, meta/slash, P.C.? [/]4Ribble! 
TRP/RBTL: 

Missing M-bed

I have lost the place where I need to insert somewhere in yesterday's post, a link that belies* the myth of faux** equivalence. Was it on NOW, or MB?

Sequester Semester (NOW) Sam Stein / tea cup in a tub glub, glub, glub. No Teddy Bull.

*By Jiminy Kimmel (knot)
** the mess age Yet to find what I needed.  A discussion of faux equivalence. U.H. Uncle Huh?[!]

An Oops on both our houses. It was "faux balance" here, but "full balance"(typo) in the transcript.
Breaking: NOW or AM (Sen)Reid will appoint negotiators if House passes CR.
BTW:  I have located the link(faux**), now I must locate where I may have hinted at the trigger.  Bold is the ticket! Owe the Irony.

[Read before share of the day.]

FOOTNOTES PAGE ONE- MAY 2014

5-4-14  In Spiration: Salon-W.R. Klemm / Sch~hhh[!] ... Who started it, I finished it, it still needs sense. (Ctrl F: sense ) Everything Model? A. Para-model, B. Almost makes me want to tweet. , C. Wittgenstein, D. The Politics of the Table. , E. What the Beck? (Witt Gen Stein's Buffet)   Milo Wolfowitz (FP2)

5-5-14:  fath:   ...:   gr :  your : [nexus, cats, herstory, herding] 1.A. NEXUS REVIEW (Re-posted) , B., C., D., E., F., G., H., I.  2. A., B. C. D. Reigning wags and tales ...  M. 3. EH? The History of B.S. 4[$]. A. B., C.Congress is Like Herding Death Panels!, D. What's good for the goose... [?] ow!  

5-7-14: SkyNet published from 5-6-14. Yes link inserted, but italics added. 

5-29-14 this:  Nixon- Plausible Deniability / Bush 43- Plausible Incompetence / Snowden- Plausible What?  Hence the word.  Posting based solely on NBC link.  4Later digging/yet/to read.  ...& further D'Ribble rather than G'Ribble;  Plausible Disciplination asks about his education and training in law or civics or what else he was educated in that might inform his understanding of this exchange with authorities, not that we should expect constitutional scholars not to have varied opinions.  Italics: not a foundation for my ainfount[><].  i.e. bu'dump ump[~]

"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..."]

The Un-Revolved(~) Thread

Wittgenstein:

Facts?  3-mat?

(~) or resolved
(~)=alt sic/pun or irony [!]

(fp?)(links in order)
1. The lecture on the Tractatus.(picture theory)
2. (b.s.) Wittgenstein (a.) (b.), (3b) Post Romaticus ,(3c), F'N 3 , "Timing is everything." , P'P' la Pew , ( ) , Ghost Busters , Crooked Timber , Coin-age of the day. , Wittgenstein , (/) No Teddy , / OW , / Forward (Ironically)
3. (b.s.) Witt gen stein
Asymetric nature of ?, Logical Track it Us[!], Reading In Progress[***], (fp), (fp) (3a-e)
4. mat/label *

* anachronism (2c=3b), (2e=3c)
(~) indicative/asterisked &(~) explained
4m@ / Asymetric nature of ?, Logical Track it Us[!] , Post R.I.P. , We have met the yogurt , Going through Hegel or... , escapement? , Epicyclical Poet Tree , Forward (Ironically) **

** label's content needs updating but (b.s.)/blog searches will evolve(see 2b/~)
(i.e.) at this point in time Wittgenstein label includes 4a thru 4h.

Third Level **/4mat: or 4p?
1. Lecture on Tractatus (27:00)
2. Discussion of Metaphilosophy
3. Intro to Tractatus
4. Vienna Circle
(fp!)

Q. E. D. [!] [?] Anti-semantics or...**

Asymetric nature of ?

power or Witt gen stein.

Ceteris Paribus Laws ? 




11-29-14
Laws of Nature/ Four Forces of.../or ~
Cul de sac of logic.
(fp~)

Dog Days, Raven Nights?

Books to Read
Labels to Write*
[Under Construction]

Table of Contents
Phase II

Navigation: Chapter One
Sub-Chapter Labels.
Note Bold Link: Not Nature vs Nurture, but verse us.
Meanwhile:
Congratulations Andrew Villeneuve on a very inspriring program last night.
"Featuring Jay Inslee, Timothy Ford, Peter Steinbrueck, Scott Macklin, and Reuven Carlyle, with Bob Ferguson as Master of Ceremonies"

Rough Ramble:
"Try Corner Hat Trick": Note Search Box or you google. Top Left Corner of Blog
The Tetrahedron? Structure, Process, Needs, Purpose

*subtitle: Grammar Grouches, Language Laws, and the Politics of Identity."For one thing linguists see valid ways of speaking all over, while lay people tend toward language chauvinism." Not that I am a third way.
Speaking of links and down under*** or frackin'** news.

** aka Churned
*** boomerang (BTW what is Australian for Head in Sand)

[Last link(s) embedded in *** un(bracketed) Hint: Jung Rang]
[Now I feel I need a road map for this post, but I will close with the two authors of two books I picked up last night: Lawrence Lessig and Stephen Colbert(now to find the other link)]
[Thom Hartmann: Economist Dr. Ravi Batra Regular guest?
[Sam Stein (HuffPo) Digital Team Returns to Obama 2012]
[OK, now I am off the charts, but I was search for a graph that would chart economic growth with deficit spending. My theory is that not only the trickle down did not work(for jobs), but it would have been worse if they had not continued to deficit spend, let alone not had wars. Not to mention, in the example(slide 14) charting the economy versus fund manager incomes.]

Darned if you do, darned if you don't...

bring things(and people) to the table. There is a dynamics of griping in this piece(Sam Steins HuffPo), but one in particular I must note:

For one, various areas of policy disagreement within the White House remained unresolved. In particular, officials familiar with the discussions say, Obama's economic advisers warned against calling for a final balance of three dollars in spending reductions for every dollar generated in additional tax revenue, arguing the ratio was too explicit.

From his (President Obama's) Fiscal Speech:

I believe reform should protect the middle class, promote economic growth, and build on the fiscal commission’s model of reducing tax expenditures so that there’s enough savings to both lower rates and lower the deficit. And as I called for in the State of the Union, we should reform our corporate tax code as well, to make our businesses and our economy more competitive.

So it seems the realization could be made that the ratio is much more balanced, recognizing loopholes as spending not additional tax revenues. While this may seem like semantics it is actually a valid accounting of rhetoric. And in some ways it is similar to the gripe that the President as leader is either "the one" or is supposed to leak his strategy to followers. By this I refer to the complaints that he kept some in the dark, yet allowed the Republicans to go first on the fiscal plan. There are many fronts in the process called government, but it is different than partisan politics or military strategy.

[Future pacing? i.e. thanks to Thom Hartmann for reference to "previous pacing" in regards to: Why don't we call it the Republican Debt and Deficits?

But after Democrats and Republicans committed to fiscal discipline during the 1990s, we lost our way in the decade that followed. We increased spending dramatically for two wars and an expensive prescription drug program -- but we didn’t pay for any of this new spending. Instead, we made the problem worse with trillions of dollars in unpaid-for tax cuts -- tax cuts that went to every millionaire and billionaire in the country; tax cuts that will force us to borrow an average of $500 billion every year over the next decade.

To give you an idea of how much damage this caused to our nation’s checkbook, consider this: In the last decade, if we had simply found a way to pay for the tax cuts and the prescription drug benefit, our deficit would currently be at low historical levels in the coming years.

That is not all...(later referred to as "hanging chad" .]

[The above presaged the Facebook Townhall with President Obama (video).(ABC? Real Clear or Misc?)]
[Then there is bold or miss-taking taxes.]

[Italics mark - editing - and I note here additional gripe from Sam Stein:

Several members of Congress also expressed agitation with the timing...(cont.) ]

Reading In Progress[***]

R.I.P.?

Bill Mauer and Sam Harris are the best case for religions.[***] 
Before I exscrabble[!] my case, I note three reference points.  First to Hegellian dialect(ic), second to democracy (Churchill)and the best, and third to Voltaire's gardening and the best.  Let alone the full crumb or hinge pin of tolerance. * (neo?)

[binary references]

[!] Witt gen stein  (and I hadn't even bit on the "binary" bit or subjective/objective "heritage".) Let alone hoist on his own cable. 

*seg way D-fact-oh? ex facto[!] (paragraph 10 militance?)
(p ll clash reaction) [p12 "willy nilly"]{p14 Jell-oh}
"stacks the deck" shelter
Fn1 (original inserts R.I.P. / neo)
Fn2 (shelter / oh)**
Fn3 (crumb / hinge)
** HeGel
Fn4 “Religion is like a pair of shoes.....Find one that fits for you, but don't make me wear your shoes.”  George Carlin
FP? : A. Unreasonable Proof of/or Reality, B.(R) F'n P[!] , C. Apples and Oranges and Cherry Picking.
(R) adjustment>B
1.  Hegel, 2. Churchill, 3. Voltaire (i., ii.)
2b. C-p, 1. 2. 3. 4. What are the Frackin' Odds...
Steal [***] yourself 4 the binary.

 

 

 

 

[***] (10-9-14) NOTE: 3 placements of the triple asterisk:

Heading, Lede and Steal. (Could read *Steele*.)

 

I may nail Wittgenstein to the door Erasmus[!]  Dimentionalism and TryUnity.

Three amigoes and the sine of the cross?   Hume or Confucius? In the name of the age of consumerism to fed up.  The branches(*4) of his(s)tory[!]  Pythagorian, Platonic, Judeo, Christian, Papal, Islam... Every age has a pater and mater. We all need a John. 

 

ITALICS (here)mightB the Paul Harvey... /(Peter Rabbit)  Re:history WholeEness.

(p."Feel the Love"?   / Q   r. R not, R2, R not, R2, R2, R not. )





 

 

C.P.U.

Citizens Progressives Untied [!]*

* Ctrl F WeGeBoard
(FP!)
1. Too Random...
2. Coin-age of the day. , Post-Pyth?
3. FP-3-14, Rat Races Van Mices?
4. Woh?
(*)
5. FP-4-13, Culture War.

Now WeGotEd! 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
But back to CPU or Mary Shelly!
Or who cast the first stein ?