Tolerance at the table?

People for the American Way presents a basic argument against the tolerance of intolerance.
Just what was Obama's purpose? ? [*] I hope there is some here.
I think I found it, and to shine the light on ...

[Maybe tabling the metaphor of the table as the well as the use of metaphor?
It also should not be a case of "reaching out" to the other side.]

[[No Dis-Respect but it is "fair and balanced".]]

[*][Update: link inserted for purpose driven foe-be-ah? And apples and oranges. I was originally focused on the lack of attention given to the benediction speaker but it is not a matter that balances the issue. Except if is balanced on the separation of church and state. It is my belief that there should be no government regulation to force the associations made in one's church and it may be said that the word marriage should be given to that category, with the caviat that states give equal rights to churches to determine their definition of marriage and the states provide for civil unions to those who choose. But no!!!! It seems that some people will not be happy with re-parsing of words, like freedom or rights..]

Sum would cheer...

the* death of Keynesian Economics, but a super Congress? Compromise is the art of not making anyone truly happy. Not to mention metaphor happy, or blossom.

[8-1-11: Debt Deal[!]
OurFuture.org , The White House, Paul Krugman, AmericanProgress.org

Winner?
Obama(& Bane Or)
and Compromise & Filibuster
(The Table and Partisanship).

Loser?
The country
and the economy.

Not to mention:
O
'N[!]
Joe.]

[*]pun will lose
[Re: The Table, with Andrea Mitchell, Chuck Todd(paraphrased)...those who oppose the deal will roar in primaries not in the general] that puts the sword of Damocles on the people and in their votes.]

[My sum mary: the sum will cheer...BULLY[!]

[And some will whine. EXTREME RHETORIC ALERT for link one of the previous three. While in all actuality, I can agree that people are dying, and there are forces alligned against the common good to blame, I cannot use the Hitler analogy that LaRouche utilizes, though the results do border on treason, it is for the people to decide not a determination that can be legally formed. Glass-Steagall is probably one solution, and the offensive PDF probably summarizes the deal accurately, and the only good thing that can come from this hyper-rhetoric is if it works, but it should not make too many people happy that it does. There is also something about the table which links what seems to be a common cause of both La Rouche and Tea Party supporters(at least of the more pragmatic and incremental Libertarian strain).]
[Process in context[!]? Right On!]
[Final Notes: Hall and Bashir 2B updated (alter or Bane).]

Apples and Oranges and Cherry Picking.

[UNITY MODEL? Or Filtering Will?]
One of the comments after the ISGR (Iraq Study Group Report) release was that it is not a fruit salad. Well, what could be said for the presidents speech? Going beyond the metaphor that he is still mixing apples and oranges when it comes to what got us into Iraq, congress must be the taster that stirs the juices from the bottom of the mix and even adds a fruit or more to the mix. I don’t know if this is just another way of straddling the fence of will and hope, but it means that while the president has a habit of cherry picking that has not changed, the fence may have tumbled under the weight of the fruit trees. Congress must call apples, apples, and oranges, oranges, and any other fruit, just what they are. The cherry here is that while it is not called a time table, there is a time frame that he is aware of. (November?) Congress much verify all the fruit in this salad, and add some that the ISGR have recommended.

Fruit salad metaphor aside, I have earlier made reference to the old adage "the proof is in the pudding", but that the hard work of the mix was not done before we got in this fix, we have seen something that is a just desert. While Bush’s admission that "Where mistakes have been made, the responsibility rests with me" is not an accounting of what his will has wrought, the following sentence "It is clear that we need to change our strategy in Iraq" is a sign of hope. Congress must verify all the ingredients in any recipes, add their own and toss the nuts. They have complete control of the pantry.

Metaphor aside, and it was not easy to stay away from the salad for the pudding, I would like to clarify more hope than just the two lines. This may tread more into cynicism as I fight the urge to indulge in it, it should be noted that the president seemed more subdued, and paced and did not resort to the patronizing act of speaking slowly. It was a very well delivered speech, delivered in a more realistic tone. Now it is our job to check that reality and work on it together. It should not be too much to ask that after six years he has made some progress, but that must not be only in the ability to more humbly deliver a speech or to conceal his recognition that someone else is in charge and that his will has a part in who soon will be.

Falling fruit trees and fence crushing aside, I will address a more subtle irony and a more specific branch. It has been said that we will fight them over there so that we won’t have to fight them over here. Now it is being said that we must clear and hold, and today the president implied that the enemy is likely to move on. That contradiction should be a big concern in the world of rhetoric but in the world of reality, it is a very big world that already has battles unmentioned, or unrealistically referred to; Afghanistan and Somalia, just two. Diplomacy was only referenced in where "We will use America's full diplomatic resources to rally support for Iraq from nations throughout the Middle East." Diplomacy is not a pep rally held by cheerleaders. I think that as General Pace, (I believe) today called this a pivot point, a focal point must be considered. The irony is that it does not fit into a world of metaphors. It only fits in a world of balance that is much more hard work, rather than a world of spin and counter-balance. I really don’t know if it is too contradictory but just the idea that the Department of Defense such as it is, is rather ironically labeled, you can see where this takes us. Maybe a Department of Peace is little out of focus as a counter balance, but that is a matter that Politics should look at. Every time Politics is noted as a matter that must be avoided, it must be looked at as a form of denial of reality, as much as the denial of Physics, Philosophy and Psychology are. Now where does this fit into our picture of what a society or civilization should be? Politics is about the balance of power, and the balance of nature that Will is a part if we picture it.

Speaking of timing

Or counting (or FOX)and follow-up(I could swear there are 6 legs unless it is on the other hand*.)
{italics not fully read yet but it is the point of departure}
{the point of arrival is not always originally intended, or that is the question.}
{note on labels, Navigation is regarding the blog, Navigation II is regarding our course changes. Maybe I should add Navigation III(a combo?).}
(Oh, and a leed change is also a challenge...to read)
* Third Way is point of tangent
[Maybe Thom Hartmann(AM1090) is coming to a realization, which I just missed(taking a call) regarding the power of Obama and his base and secondary potential thread. My points here are: Obama's base is not the liberal left. The Right's loss is the Left's loss, but the middle's gain.(I just coined** that.) My original metaphor*** was, as Republicans lose voters, they become more concentrated, while as Democrats gain voters they are diluted. ]
** critics please pick a better word for this new paraphrase of my original concept, other than coined, is in not that it is not making money for me, but I am just not sure that you coin a phrase. "turned" may suffice.
*** actually a metaphor would have a concept like Lemonade or Kool-aid as an ingredient, which apparently I have previously avoided saying directly at least.
[Still needing to read the italics link, Thom Hartmann and callers are still frustrated, and discuss the Marxist concept that things have to fail first. I am uncertain that is technically a valid name for it, but my point is that dynamically it will not work that way on two counts. It would take people who want it to fail(whatever it is) and it would take people giving up on changing it. That is why peace is much harder work than war, and why it is much harder and slower to make progress than to see the same things again.]
[Post-Pre-emptive Comment: or rather footnote regarding bubbles and cliffs and easing the wall down. Post Hartmann comment: one of my tangents was inspired by the concept of not enough mentionalism, a pun on the dimension of perspectives and whether there are two parties, or three or four or whether the labels matter. But the more the merrier or at least the more the discussion and the bigger the table.]
[Post Building on Change update: "That is why peace is much harder work than war, and why it is much harder and slower to make progress than to see the same things again." Bold added above, but link back provided as promised here.]
[Just in...Breaking or rather Re-Creating the mold: and I am only up to the word "defecit" in Steve Clemons question but I am having a feeling it relates to my just bolded and repeated quote in last bracket, and to wrap this up before it is too diffuse I seems to build upon earlier comments if not leeds.]

F'n P[!]

an-archy? / tan gent
[!] sarcasm irony punk.
Lede or Ship:  Heading

4 M or links in order of insert
(In F able. / punc. / -archy / gent)

War'n Buffet Rule
The P ?
Original Intent: almost lost, Footnotes Page # ?
Gephardt*  -House Republicans Changed the Rules to Keep Government Closed
McConnell  -Who Controls the House GOP?
Battle. -  George W. Bush and the Real Story of the Great Recession****  - (b.s.) Buffet + Warren
Re  - Buffet +Metaphor
:  - Rule + Field
congre$$ - [War'n Pic/MoveOn]
AM:
Pelosi/
Klobuchar
Gang **

** links/line anachronistic
AM=Andrea Mithell
*** Deep Files Go 4 it.

(buy Jim'n Knee: Faith 'n Progress ?)
[The Cycle? New Hostage on the Table. /  Measured Optimism ? ]
[If you don't vote, you won't get your pudding.  How can you get your pudding when you won't eat your meet?]

Supreme Court Decision on Voter ID

Is The SCOTUS Picking Another President? By making this decision now, it may have an impact on the Indiana primary, and the Democratic race. Not mentioned is the impact that John McCain being the presumptive nominee for Republicans has on voter turnout of crossover "Democrats".

While the whole Florida-Michigan fiasco, was based on the early elections hoping to put them more in play, that and the McCain "success" make late players more in play. These complicated cross-currents, not only make Florida-Michican but all late races more in play. It is ironic that so many want the race to be over, which would disenfranchise the late states, but the Supreme Court decides early to have their say on Indiana, while McCain is sidelined from the media scrutiny and Republican support as well.

[update: "Fair and Balanced"* Sermon ] And Breaking!
[on the Indiana law, I don't know if there is much evidence that there is actual voter ID fraud, but there is evidence (in different states] of voter disenfranchisement fraud and other violations of law by Republicans, a broad claim I will not detail at this time, but which include the "remedy" Indiana has installed.]

* for the culturally untuned: the motto of Fox News

[delayed broadcast of The Ed Schultz Show just ended: He points to the 180 that Obama has done on Wright but ...with McCain he can do it in a sentence or two. And I dislike the metaphor of throwing anyone under the bus, but it should call into question who will be "at the table" or what that means for Clinton, Obama or McCain.]

Toning Down the Lines.

Just in case it was not clear, my Waiting for [Calm Cast] was not just a metaphor, and Comcast did arrive to increase my signal strength by toning down my lines. Hmmm. That works. But what I also wish to make clear is that while some may rightly argue the wisdom of another involvement in military action that the tone and approach are totally different than recent actions. If Congress wishes[*] to have a different view, they may need to take certain measures to make clear where military action is appropriate, until that time the Commander in Chief is responsible (for) foreign policy, upholding international treaties and the U.N. charter. Now I also need to sort out a few of these links, but my point is that this time our action is only as a leader of a united concern that is a bit clearer than recent actions, and those with veto power in the U.N. did not use their vetos. Of course actions may evolved based on certain reactions, but that is the nature of putting things clear or on the table.

[*] bolds and (for) added 3-22-11

FOOTNOTES PAGE TWO AUGUST 2013

8-1-13:"up date"(sc)(b.s.)(1)Connecting the Dots(sc), Culture War (2)(a), Way, Too Point Oh?(sc), Noble, No Bell, Nobel(sc), Congress- - to boldly go..., Everything is on the Table!.

8-5-13:  (b.s.) a.Pun it?, b.Trilemmas and Cultural Calculus, c.Enough Smirking!, d.Dark Matter, Anti-Matter, e. Careful Consideration , f. , g. , h. Con Fluence... , i.Knot Even , j., k.Carpe Diem!, l.Certain Sources..., m. , N .by Stiob?!?, o., P.Middle C? , Q. / [T-Row Price?]

8-9-13 (37) "dealing with" (MSNBC "All IN" & Thomas Roberts) (P.S. re:Bromance)

8-20-13 Boatload of FP needed.  4. a C Sick? , b , c , d , e , f , G , h , i Square This!  j , k , 5. a, b, c by Stiob?!? - 6. a, b() Nailed It! T-point Oh! , c CU T-party, d , e , f, g , h Square This! , ... q Tea Party Down Grade

8-21-13 Miranda Lefts? 1. a. b. c. d.  /   2.  A. b. c. d. e. f. g. h. i. j.
8-22-13: FC /  changey thing to reads.
8-26-13 Lemon Ship may be the best name for the dynamic metaphor as I sort out how it has evolved.  Does it stem from partisan ship?  But it does refer to concentrates and dilutions.
8-27-13 Knot so Out of the Blue? 
8-28-13: A Black and White Chat, that is the ticket.(FP3)

The Nature of Things

Air America Today shouts Fifty-Nine!
It seems to imply that Democrats are off the hook. The moderate/independent middle seems to say that they want checks-and-balances which in turn should turn progressives loose now that there is a potential filibuster. Some have accused this middle of being low-information voters, but others claim them to be those that want the change they were promised or in the case of Massachusetts, those that have their health care and worry about the cost, not to mention jobs being a priority. This is my preemptive take from the heading, not the article.

Also the word Revolution has been bandied about. A caller suggested that the Reagan "Revolution" should have been a called a Counter Revolution. I would suggest it would be appropriately called a Devolution but unfortunately Revolution implies a spin that will continue unless there is real change. Now to switch a flat tire to a flat earth, there is a slippery slope because there is trickle down. That means that progress will always be slippery and up hill, or those that rise will only be on* the backs of others. [Correction: they do need the backs of others but they can't rise by flattening them.]

*scratch "on the backs of others": replace with "the burden of others."

[See "nature of things"]
[Extended metaphor: The ping pong ball is flat!(maybe it always has been, or it is more than about games and parties.)]
[BTW: a conference table can be round but it is still flat]

Speaking of Timing

All posts are posted at the time indicated unless otherwise noted*, not always clearly, as updated or inserted**.

* saved-in-draft maintain original time with date posted indicated
** sometimes indicated by links

Sometimes bracketed material is a preface, and
now to the matters that triggered this tangent.
It was a surprise to me and others that the Debt Panel released its(or rather the co-chair's) plan, an interesting update to my comments in the update regarding the chart and debt. It is probable that the chart, may not include social security, and regarding medicare, off the chart going forward. But given the shotgun approach, not really a good metaphor(as aim is not the point), but as a matter of breadth and coverage, it is all over the map and "harpooned every whale"***. While the origin of the Debt Panel(link hopefully to be inserted)is in question, (was it Obama's or a Republican idea) it does seem to fit my theory of Obama. The solutions to our economy are very broad, and inter-related, and hinge on the balance of what government does, more particularly does it create jobs or the environment for the economy. The answer is usally, if not always, both to some degree. In this regard, any wholesale dismissal of the plan is in as much error as even calling it a plan. It seems a well crafted way to put everything on the table, not that it will all be called for or passed.

*** Simpson quote from Bloomberg link.
[Speaking of timing and updates and tangents, Fair Game is a movie noted in C-word post, but Decision Points(book) is the center of the Circumference. Somewhere there is a link that closes the circle.]
[Speaking of Spokes: Axel Rod?]

The Vice President Rolls

Currently speaking before*** the NAACP, Vice President Biden drives** President Obama's record against the wall that is* the Republican party and their candidate. 

(Brakin' news on Bane or change "existentialist" opposition research Raw Money the con spiracy candid ate.  See aster risks[!])  It may be more than interesting how things Pan out [!]

*** (anachronism)"ain't your father's" mess age in? ( i.e. links to be added )
**"eviscerate" was originally one of the choices in my lede
*awkard metaphor
[Note that asterisk were placed progressively: *,**,***]
[Links inserted *** in reverse, after the link it applies to "before". The broke-in pun of existential ism is "interesting" "pa"n "out" [!] Ctrl F Spells = prophetic.]
[Ouch what a fet we weave.]

SEG WAY: GPS of sorts? 
I have updated several PAGES today. Re- sorts of sort.
The plan is to review the meta4s.  (Buffet/Table Structure/Drive)
Or restructure the "L"aments of existentialism.
Earth, Wind, Fire, Water. Con Science?

(7-13-12: links 2&3& YouTube and Speech label added)

Obama 2012

The appropriate follow up for Economics 2011
Netting it big with Bridge Poker.

Week old Last Word: It is not Republican checkers against Obama and N-dimensional chess, it is whatever you call the Republican bored games against Obama*** and his Bridge Poker*. That is my take, not Lawernce O'Donnell's.

[My guess is that whatever is voted on will be politically beneficial**, win or lose.]

*more than just the table games
** for Democrats
*** not much of a chess player myself, I think it is a bad metaphor. A bit more of a poker player and less of a bridge player, I did not know there was actually the game of Bridge Poker. But negotiations are one thing and politics is more the thing, so a bit of Go Fish might be thrown in. And if wishes were fishes we'd be fed up.
[Belated Happy Birthday to MSNBC!]

[Later in the day, apparently Speaker Boehner bails out or has taken the bait: Remarks by the President:

So they will come down here at 11:00 a.m. tomorrow. I expect them to have an answer in terms of how they intend to get this thing done over the course of the next week. The American people expect action. I continue to believe that a package that is balanced and actually has serious debt and deficit reduction is the right way to go. And the American people I think are fed up with political posturing and an inability for politicians to take responsible action as opposed to dodge their responsibilities.

[Earlier Obama Town Hall]

[7-24-11: The Deadliest Catch]

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.]

What's good for the goose...

is good for the gander.

Re: Honeymoon and Herding The marriage metaphor could be useful longterm, while some may be more heirarchical and focused on the passion.
No Bear v. Bull or the high way.
Way!

The point is that progress takes precedence. If we don't get what we want, we don't leave the table. Yet maybe absence makes the heart grow fonder? Since congress is not a marriage and nor are the relationships with the executive and the judiciary, just keep in mind in any sinking ship we must bail while we heave ho.

It's Obama's Turn

[Keep the Change(scroll down)]

Of course.
Stay the course.
The private* sector is fine
verse US economic turn around.
[Hardball Metaphor.  Making the case.***]

* E. G. Private Equity Government
(The nuts and bolts?  If Romney cannot understand that the economy has turned around, then what will happen when he turns it around.)
[Ouch ! ]
[Politics Nation ? ]
[Whip Republicans with Reagan and Clinton!]
Thom Hartmann?
Word of tomorrow?  Pernicious.**
[Coffee Table This! The Fifth Element.]

6-10-12 Keep the Change!
Yes this is a bumper sticker for Obama!  Though the links may be a bumper sticker for Clinton or nuance.  Not that I have fully read them yet, I will try to stay the course, not to mention other threads.

6-11-12
Inconvenient Try-Angle !
NOW w/ Corny Copy Ah. "Mind the Gaffe(added 6-13)": "food fight"



Verse us Tony TruthyahKnow.

** anachronism approved:  "Perspective" was Norman Goldman's word of the day(Thursday). "Scale" was my suggestion(for Friday), and "pernicious" was my word for Monday.

6-12-12
Curb Your Enthusiasm !
[Duct Tape?  Goose Pate!]
[(Middle - Name / N SC ?)]
[ Bubble Up]

6-13-12
Jeb Bush: Walk Back ?
(Hardball)
*** link(s) added
McCain sabotage.
NOW "Picking up the Tab".

6-14-12
Keep the Change!
"Different Visions" NOW!
Past is prologue or (unpassed)Middle - Name.(Scroll-up)

Happy Birthday to us!
The Dickens We Say!
Better to look back than go back!
Preemptive Comment this AM:  Obama battles for Fiscal Reality!
Geitner is speaking on Andrea Mitchell Reports.
Andrea Mitchell pulls Geitner's leg on Romney, but he doesn't bite.

Romney wants to get it done.  He doesn't want to look back, he wants to Re-Right!  If we look back we will see his Re-Write. 
Overhang of Obamacare? 
It's coming back?
[Not to mention "No New Taxes"!  Old taxes will do fine.]
Segue: Presidents Speech to be inserted later.
[Thom Hartmann Couples Counseling/Next President will take credit for "breaking up" better economy.] Talk is cheap?

The New Compendium

NOT!
Really...probably not.
But it sounds like an epoch
and not quite an anthology,
but hopefully not an achronism.

THE POINT?
A cover page of sorts.
Yeah that's the ticket!
...the dynamics of progress,

Six Things Everybody Knows About Deficits ...
That Are Completely Untrue
Which I rephrase as truths:

1.) Current and future spending are not the problem with the defecit, except for paying for our history.
2.) Social Security is not a big deal to fix(separately), but could be impacted by the budget and other decisions.
3.) Austerity and investment are different stories, that both have an impact on the budget and winning the future as well as the now.
4.) Concessions should not be trickle down but incentives should be target up.
5.) Wall Street is not fixed enough to be that big or permanent a part of the solution.
6.) Social Security is not on the same budget table as Medicare and Medicaid and calling them "entitlements" is misleading, and means testing or tax changes could address their impact on our economy.

[Mis-click of the mouse of the day]
Slash Segue(Aristotellian)[A]
Maybe you had to be there.
The Bill Thing.
The Frackin' Thing.
The Club of Construction.[ B ]
The King Tut of Rhetoric
Not to mention Divagation.

BTW: Going Egypt depends on who you ask, and I am not asking Stephen or Steve King***. And Going Wisconsin should not mean Going Cheesehead*. But I will tie this up with a preamble. If I may paraphrase and extend the remarks of a caller to the Norman Goldman Show: If you are not for "a more perfect Union" you may be Un-American. If you are not willing "to promote the General Welfare" you may be militant against "the Blessings of Liberty", but one can take words (and rhetoric or puns) too far. I suggest the word militant not be used, and that nowwhere near the tactics be used in political protests** but just who expects whom to turn the other cheek? There seems to be a slippery slope in the free speech zone.

* my original intent was a pun on Ed Head, which is not a Soft Head, but then there may be a lede to leader in the eventual link.[I believe it was a caller to the Ed Schultz Show that lead me to independently think that the failure of unions in Wisconsin would put a whole new spin on the name Cheeseheads.]

** the right to protest and any intent to break the law, includes the right to be arrested but not beaten, though we should understand that resistence is not futile but few put up with it well

*** see previous clause "divagation" link and prior line "Tut" for the two Kings.

[A,B updates]
[2-18-11 Blank(updated)Network- Parallel Channel(See The Pair o' Lax View ) Updates under construction. SERIOUSLY these are a serious sorting of views.]

[See Follow Up]

[Note Jumping the Gun Again! i.e breaking in-box of (news) sorts (AKA: sports metaphor not target or weapon analogy) Meaning the CPAC divide regarding the Islamophia section of The Progress Report is hint at the LAME O' PHOBIA of Platonic Dialogue not to mention a cave[of irony] of or con tent... or CAP]

Fed~Upism?

Knit One?
(a. FP4 (2-20-15) FP$, b.Footnotes Page December 2014(Page One), c. Schiller, Schelling, Shell Lacking and Schopenhauer*?, d. Shilling / Schiller, e. Try Angle Nation )
Pear Type-Oh? Re:nacre
(a. Knit one , b. or ?, c. Going through Hegel or..., d. Crooked Timber, e. 'n?, f. Gatekeeper on a High Horse?, g. Remember Pearl Harbor! )

Ctlr F: type-O.(...) [!]
Irony within Onion ? [!]
Misplaced support ? (...)
(a. QCON and Flip-Flop: AN IRAN OUT, b. Under the Table?, c.The day of the Elephant?, d. Leveling the World Stage?, e. For Careful Processing:, f. There was the 3 AM call..., g. And Bailout..., h. GOLEFT TV  ...?)

(un-Mbedded consequences? 4Lab-L's)

4-14-15
(fp?) mobius :A. THE TRUTH APPARENT: A MOBIUS LAP , B. , C. Too Random... , D. Re:Figure , E. Rough Riders , F. The Undisclosed Bunker Branch of the Government. G. Borrow and Twist- a surfing metaphor? , H. Stuart Smally Anyone? , I. RUNNING WITH RHETORIC .