Genre Clash

or Mutation?

FOK'rs (Friends of Keith'rs) were noted on the...STEPHANIE MILLER SHOW, along with a rumor from above. Un...like the fabled "unexpressed thought".*





* not to make fun of dog killers, only the forum of Tucker's in second video
[and I did not mean to rhyme]
[and for "some people", genre refers to the medium(& mutation) of the mess age.]
[for others...]
[ and back to the future...express]***

*** this is an overpass to the "turn" spike [With the parsing of the great genre in Keith, the rise of the Young Turks, Matthews is the Oddball in my book. Too cute by half, but not these haves.

[Afternoon update, from my Oddball book, aka Edutainment and speculation, from Ed Schultz the President Obama's 5 year "in non-security, discretionary spending" budget freeze: actually the speculation is mine that many things can be on the table as security and many others are not as discretionary. But it may be a Peter, Paul and Robin' hood scenario. AKA a spin on our past presidents. But seriously or rather flippantly, the book is also about false equivalents. Rachel is no Jon Stewart, Olbermann is no Glenn Beck, Matthews is no "fair and balanced", and Ed Schultz is no Rush, though he does get flush at times. It is about the dialogue, even if it is grand sitting at times.]
[And an earlier crack at the table...aka footnotes of pre-ignition.**]

** and this is an achronistic asterisk i.e. just have to make sure that there are three, and to note that the Mutation link and all that follows was based on only seeing the first few minutes of The Daily Show. [Achronistic is timely in a third way as the third asterisk is placed earlier and regards another post. Not this one though. (At least in toto and one sitting.)]
[Parting asterisks of "past presidents" I like Teddy. Oh Bear Man?]

[1-28-11 Update]

Two Wrongs Make a Right?

Romney would rather have the discussion be, him as a victim of class warf**are, than discussing the choice between his (Ryan/Bane or Priebus/Gitmo) economy and the Obama Economy.
(Trigger? Hardball!)
(Out-sourcing/Off shoring? That's the ticket or GitMo.)
(Kill*** the Strategy:  More Politics ofor* the Table.)

* [!]  not quite over(Water Sport anyone)

[7-11-12 All links added today.]
[Not sure about the Hardball. Is that the ticket?]

**A mitt-insert, structural typo, or metaphorical evolution of warf-are. 
*** Skirting the poly ticks.(Holder v. Hold-up)
[Not that out-sourcing or off-shoring are wrong, but man up ...] *iv

  

$urfin'USA...

*iv: [!]= sarcasm/typo meta/prophetic

[4mooLAY$hun: foundation+buffet=table ?]

[Big Ed: dog and pony ref ;-)]

P.S. (Pre-Selection: Romney/Ryan 2012)

Happy Holidays

Merry Christmas to the Democrats
and Happy Boxing Day to the Republicans,
not to be PC or leave any others out.
Or other coping havens of hope.

[President Obama Hails Reform/Salon]
[Here they are! The Bills side by side. Detroit Free Press]

[Note that the above two links were read and inserted after the rest of this post, except ** and ***, not to mention David Sirota ]
My comment:

It would seem to me that Congress should be able to "get 'er done" without the 60 votes. Either as some suggest by "going nuclear" (I am against Nuclear Power but) by blowing up the filibuster or somehow utilizing a reconciliation or conference process to do it. Failing that, there are probably enough progressives to kill the bill, but that may not be necessary[or advised**]. Removing the mandate, just might put this in the category of a budget issue under reconciliation, but failing to remove the mandate, might just put this on the track for constitutional review and modification, where it is imagined that a public option just might be the only option. It just might be wise for the Republicans not to push the constitutional issue and settle for a public option now, possibly with a 10-15% buyin margin on Medicare. In the alternative, giving states an option to have a public* plan, and freeing those to sell out of state, might be another crack in the (just say no)[***] armor.

[TruthOut/McClatchy -- Steve Clemons/Huffington}

* one Representative mentioned that the option would have a name other than public, and that could just be non-profit or within the caps imposed.

[In a bit of Re-Mythication, I might say: From hurding cats to a real cat fight, this is no sausage or hot diggity dog eat dog world. Or from Real Mythication to Real Miffication in regards to others, it is better than FAUX News.]

[** semantics are more than a quibble between liberals and progressives, but between principles and progress (side note: some claim that "progressive" is just a label to avoid the "liberal" charge but both are needed, while labels should not give cover for inaction or misconceptions.]
[***(late insert) also: or just say now]

RETRO NOTE: The Ed Show. Not to mention Miff Maddow.
[1-7-09 Hit Ping Pong (see Shhhh!) on the table.]

Who needs Republicans

with fungible Democrats who don't even know they are at the table. Well, consider that they may have pushed themselves from the table and no scraps for the blue dogs.[*] But if and when they vote for the bill or not, they can be considered bi-partisan. I mean that is the fungible logic that has come from Republicans**.

[7-24-09 * asterisk and link added(and bold to first link) of this saved in draft QCON which I now post with the addition of two perspectives: Obama at Shaker Heights / Spinning Health Care: A Bad Case of Vertigo Norman Soloman - Truthout Perspective
** I need a better link to the logic of previous Republican claims of their bipartisanship, but I think fungible applies to their logic almost across the board. And I am not suggesting we remove the Blue Dog scraps and Republican amendments, but you might better see the link I make depending on how they vote.]

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.]

"hair of the dog"

Alan Shrugged
by Marty Kaplan The Huffington Post

Slang for Morning Joe** or not* your cup of tea. OK, I mixed metaphors or drinks, implying a wake-up. Actually I may have something here, as the bailout, or rescue has not yet reached a full intervention, and will it?

*On a lark I looked up Morning Read which you need not, nor dig up Slang Note: bold link is the read for the day.
** I don't catch the show but would recommend Rachel Maddow getting another 2 hours.

[Evening update: the way this comment weaves I might refer to the navigation link. Meanwhile another link: I need to unembed or consider the table.
In particular:
a list of economists I had intended to sort as progressives, Noted in the article - Joseph Stiglitz, Dean Baker, Jared Bernstein. Not noted - Paul Krugman, Ravi Batra: Meanwhile: Kudos to Krugman. Speaking of Laffer and Elixirs ]

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.]