To Be Arranged

(Re-modeling) Right Column:*
postings and other sources**
Navigation 1st use
Navigation II 1st use
Navigation 3.0 1st use
See those labels below, as they may evolve.
Labels 1st use

IMAGE INSERTED (see bottom line)

[Post-image insert, note ledes under leeds must be edited.
i.e. typo sometimes let go, sometimes intended, but who knows, or vise verse us[!]]


For the time being I will leave item 2 "as is."
But to note ledes:
Primary Boogeyman
Pay Dirt / Tax Mud
Calm Pend E Um
Table of Contents
Churned Media
Navigation 3.0
Making New Rounds
Right To Life
Leaking Intelligence
Odyssey Dawn
There was nothing...
Think Blue
I Told You So
The Tetrahedron
The one thing?
Segue/Sabbatical
2-20-11 Under Construction
The Maze of Mace
The Answering Machine
Bridging the English Channel
Note: this is the content at the link Navigation II(see label) as of 1-17-12

*this will be item 1
** see comment (1 below) regarding template upgrade
[template upgrade has evolved my need for change]

IT MAY HAVE NOW BECOME UNNECESSARY FOR ME TO INSERT PREVIOUS POST.***
THE BLOG ARCHIVE IS NOW WHERE I WAS GOING TO LOCATE ITEMS 1, 2 etc.
[This condition may evolve as I play with formats/templates.]
Labels label added.

*** apologies for anachronistic asterisks (No TrippleA [I. e!])
NFRY = not fully read yet: AKA not necessarily to be read soon.
Also not necessarily a valuable label, as it applies so frequently.
Today's Alex Wagner and Andrea Mitchell, especially the latter with Chris Matthews review a lot of the haggling of the Republican Race(slash debate), context and hyperbole.(see 1-17-12 scroll down here) Speaking of LBO[!] See AM and Leveraged Buy Outs and links lost(I thought I had embedded it somewhere today).(not to mention up tight[a,b,c] or out of sight asides.)(see lost here and found there, under fanciful economics, but not nfry.)[Meet the Press/FOXnews]
[Not pun/link TrippleA a D'Ribble: A ribble is a ribbing and a riddle. Not always labeled. First uses: Ribble, further parsing of first uses may be problematic. But here is a shot at D'Ribble and G'Ribble. A D'Ribble is a De-Ribble with few permutations, while a Grand Ribble may be close to an Obama Ribble which was probably an accident.]
[Not to go on and on, but related to the pre-bracketed regarding NFRY and AM(slash)race "the nation"...]
[Speaking of anachronisms (See Image/inserts)]

Charlotte 2012!

The DNC Convention!
Turn-around is fair play. 
Missed sarcasm: watch word.
The watch word is turn around. 
Bring it on!
The whole table.

PIG: Progress is Good!
(Not to Or well[!]...exactly)
On elements or style...


Table of Context[!](to follow)...
CAUTION though.
[Updates used to leave the original date of post intact. That changed recently.
I don't know if that is a Rovism or an AlGoreRhythm, but what the google or frack.]

[!]TOC
[take to footnotes**/under construction]
frack
google*
Rhythm
recently
though- (scroll-over)
or- exactly- table- whole- word - watch- sarcasm- fair play- around- turn- convention- DNC-

*see chart
(need other image?)
** might not

MSM Bungler Alert

In-"F"able Fallout?

Vu due the meth. 
Parlay vous Fudge eh ?
Chaize Knee ?

Jimmy Buffet ?

OK, I could not find the flippin' table image, and the fact that these appointments are embarrassing is not to be denied, but in reality it is like the half pipe or thin ice(or thick slush) of scoring?  Do they take the best or ski cross figures?  i.e.  As I have calculated there are 115 career and 58 political ambassadors holding office.  Which includes 36 career versus 40 political in the second term.  That seems to mean that 79 "careers" and 18 "politicals" were at their posts in the first heat/term. 

Image of Original In Tent

Re: Sources

C W
Homer, Plato**, Hell'nistic, Hamiltonian/Jeffersonian *: Evolutionary Thinking***.

* less than random link/Google of the day?
not fully read yet,
never completely endorsed, unlike Labelists [Well...not exactly.]

** lede not

[The under lying(pun) under standing(literal) as well as substance, regards semantics. Now that is a pretty firm line for a fluid foundation.
See W(hint pun/ribble)
The history of the constitution falls into this spectrum. The Federalist Papers were an argument, for what does not matter, it won and lost, as the amendments suggest. The constitution was signed but not without compromise. And we were never on the same page again. This is my perspective without the usual qualifiers.]
*** How prophetic?

[Unoriginal In tent: related links without hints]
[On the other hand... looking for spectrum.]

[Given the field of the Republican Presidential race, no apologies are in order. Excuses maybe, blame yourself. BTW: not disappointed by Herman Cain, to drop out but carry the mess age to the table. But in honor of the Federalists, the non-party party, here is a third field or party or option. Caution!]

[NPR: Re-education]
[Update: Herman

I'm not even

gonna read this yet, or MoveOn to this. But is this the deal?
[Scroll over links for 'nuf context]
It seems a spectrum of progress and contrast. From Bush, to Blair, from Tea Parties, to Newt. Each looks better in perspective to the others.
[9-15-10 Re: further preemption]
[Counter Balance[*] of Table]
[Just noting the complexities of international diplomacy and domestic politics, as well as the "two party" system. While we near a deal of major import, minor fears drive local divisions, and have major costs. Democrats run divided, while Republicans divide to run. While this is not a clear and fair analogy, as of course division is needed in races within parties. But Democrats have not created a party to run against itself, while it has those in office who run rather* independent.]
[And Under the Radar]
* see Balance above and cost of debt and war

[Image use and source; original.]

[*][On the other hand, extending only the middle-class Bush tax-cuts only reduces the borrowing by $700 billion.]
[9-16-10: extending the Bush Tax cuts: adds $3.9 trillion** to National Debt, while extending only those above $250K would add only $3.22 trillion. i.e. reduce by $680 billion. ]
** 3.8? Quote: Extending them for the next 10 years would add about $3.8 trillion to a growing national debt that is already the largest since World War II. About $700 billion of that reflects the projected costs of tax cuts for those in the top 2 percent of income-earners.

Brackets and the Debt Clock

[9-26-11 UPDATE: Tax Plan and "Fiscal Terrorism" A slight rearrangement and edit for clarity below. ]

[In might be easier if the links and asterisks are referenced later.***]

The whole issue of cuts over revenues * _ must be sorted out on two fronts. There is the issue of the so-called "progressive" tax code. Then there is the issue of the history of the tax code(see* pun), and how it impacts the debt clock.

The first regards the "Buffet Rule". There are the actual tax bracket rates(10% to 35%), and then there is the effective tax rate, which is further complicated(reduced) by captial gains tax rates(15%). Let us also be reminded that even the richest pay the same rates for their first brackets worth of income,(ZERO), let alone each bracket's worth of income. But since the capital gains tax is most of the income of the bulk of the rich, the effective tax rate will not be the actual sum of each bracket's worth. I will not bother to do some math here, but I hope it is clear. Basically the effective tax rate for the rich are not effective as "progressive" by a look at their brackets. They effectively get a lower tax rate, because capital gains are taxed less than the middle to top income brackets.

Second, there is the matter of the "Debt Clock", which should have its own brackets of sorts. The Bush wars, as well as his Medicare(fix), not to mention his tax cuts are off the clock so-to-speak. Not to mention the economic down turn which should probably reset the clock. If I was able to clarify the first issue, I don't mean to make up for it by complicating the second. But the "spending under borrowing" is more than a pun, it is an economic effect. For now I just mean to address the clock issue. Where I imagine that there could be some way to show previous administration's as well as the current administration's** debt clocks.

Now, I hope that I can get away with not providing more detail. But it is not so simple, as I almost closed the issue. It would not be simply an historical replay of their debt clocks, but a sorting of the debt from their budgets. So we would have several clocks at different brackets in time. This is the matter, where the devil is in the details. This almost becomes a matter for mathematical physicists in regard to the dynamics of budgets and time, in that each bracket in time has potential future impact where political economists would sit in for the mathematical physicists.

But, I hope that it can be imagined that each bracket in time, have two clocks. Their own budget and the debt that was not theirs. I will leave it for real economists or accountants to sort out whether there needs to be more than two, as I don't know if it is just my imagination, or the reality of the difficulty in sorting this out. In this regard, I mean the difficulty of sorting a budget's impact over time. But maybe it can be imagined from the effective impact that war and medicare can have on people and how dynamic that is over time, let alone the setting of tax rates. In fact, that is addressed by one or two instances alone. The Bush tax cuts were temporary. The Bush wars and the Medicare fix were not paid for.



[Please note that the links and image were inserted after completion of this blog post. They include, in order: The New York Times, FOX NEWS, No-Labels, and the Center for American Progress [9-26-11: OurFuture.org], where it was not my intent to lower the level of discourse nor bring more nuanced metaphor to light. But please note my No-Labels comment, in regard to the referees and what is on the table. Not to pun on a game buffet, but the neither the cuts sandwich nor the sand wedged in links were referenced for the writing of this post. But it may be suitable that brackets and clocks are used in games. This is a not so nuanced reference to the sports analogy of politics.]

*which alone needs some economic sorting: I mean "spending under borrowing", to pun a bit.
** oops, a whole new clock issue, why not bracket it by congresses?
*** not to mention by myself

[9-23-11 Update 'nuff s' Ed?] Iron Chef!

[9-29-11 update on timing, see comment 2. Speaking of timing,(darn) lost it for a moment.]