Miranda Warning!

Stand your legislation. * 

Pun on knot or Tan Gent shall ?

* [See ***] (snow den) Greenwald/Miranda**  FISA ?
** a, b, c

[Not to pun on keeping quite, but hear, here to facing charges, and progress on transparency in a sea of non-Cents.]
[*** links 1 & 2 inserted post asterisks & are yet to reads]
[Yet knot!  ... Everything is(a) not open to transparency, not to mention not too Aeschylus.]

( ( 9 9 9 ) ) [links minus 4]

8-21-13 Saved in Draft: House/NOW/Harman - Knee. Knot ... ? Who nows[!]

A pause-itive thought.

Infinity.

If there is an infinity of time going forward and back, why not the now.
Well, the space-time "continuum" deals with that.

Then, I have three blogs.  They are not mine.  They are just called mine on my Blogspot dashboard.
I don't actually follow them.  They just happen to deal with material and what matters in a parallel way.
Example:

The GOP’s Purity Problem

Transparency: The battle is far from over

We Can Say It, But You Can’t

Now, speaking of dimentions ... [!]

BTW:  I am not conned by Darwin's God.  I've only begun to think and thread lede or ships. 

Models are the new frontier.  Reading is not fundamental.  Math is the bigger picture.

The Dems have a purity problem to, transparency is problematic and Darwin's God may be ironic.

6-10-16
Darned if this doesn't start out* with a wave equation, that is probably related to the geometry of a sphere.

* actually at 3:21

C Sick?

CNN may be a cup o'tea.
C Wave... Ouch!
See sea et al...& new careers.
Lawrence O'Donnell (LO Low and behold)
[My original intent was in the LO and behold.]
[... on the other hand, sitting in for Chris is Chuck!(See hosts.)]
[Speaking of Left Behind*]

* I was unable to find the Hardball link which referred to "Left Behind" but the "Left" above is a backlash from the Sherrod "lesson".
[7-23-10 bolds added and note: I am complimenting CNN's coverage of the Sherrod situation, and comparing/contrasting the latest Rangel reaction, as well as Chuck Todd(for Chris Matthews) hosting a conversation. Update "lesson".]
[There may be a silver lining to a Rangel ethics trial, it is about transparency and justice, and politics. Congress can hold their own accountable and demonstrate the hypocrisy of fair and balanced ethics, let alone justice. Some are suggesting he be removed post haste, and that would not serve justice or transparency.]
[Compare and Contrast(no comma)Pragmatism**.]

** to be relinked to later report on extending tax cuts or reform.[Meanwhile*** on the more practical than political.]

*** also breaking: needed link to Dylan Ratigan w/Chris Kofinis on change of business as usual.

Pass the Trillion.

The problem with some Democrats? They listen. The problem with others, they play by the rules. Grayson is the new Democrat, Franks the old Democrat. OK, I am trying not to spin this, but others spin about the situation.

I find it hard to blame the Republicans for holding the line for what they believe, right or wrong. I find it hard to urge the Democrats to hold the line by taking back from the table what may have been put in the package to appear non-partisan or to please certain pockets. But that is the nature of politics and the transparency is apparently being worked on. There still may be some passing the buck but it is about what works and change. Ching, ching, no pun.

BIG HINT: There is a table at the table;
Fiscal Economic Bank for the Buck Moody's basically seems to dispute what Republicans think(or at least say) works. In fact it seems that spending is 2 to 6 times more effective than tax cuts depending on the focus. In fact there is little bang for the buck Bush style. But this is apparently on GDP and that may not be an effective metric. One must still follow the money.

[filed]more for later
Stimulus package: Jobs gained or saved? Christopher S. Rugaber AP
Senate to demand big changes in stimulus bill. Zachary Coile, SF Chronicle

[for tinkering]
Poetic Justice
hiatus or sabbatical
Stop that!
Tinkering...
American Recovery
Previous post may take unwinding

Food for Thought...

Or Fodder for Field Blossoms ?

F1*, f2,   

* links unembedded further "fodder for" ? !

5-20-13: Krugman perspectivism.
I'm not saying...
Is it a win for transparency or more of the same GOP trickle-down?
James Rosen Treason?
Robert Kennedy Jr. Plumbers?

FB
Recently Pulled Submission(Not by me)  Re: Watergate/ Democrats ~ holding to their own standards ~ their own~ http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-f-kennedy-jr/obama-nixon-watergate_b_3305611.html

C: Green walled [!]

5-22-13*** 
IRS testimony**, the other Rand, McCain/Graham Rice, "fool's errand" [?]
**Issa touts the 5th (C-NOW w/ Alex Wagner) "Republicrats" "Democans" "barking up the wrong tree" Charlie Cook.
(*** b.s.): Knot So Well ?  Sheep in FOX clothing? 

5-23-13: Boardman, Reich, Wired, Cole ? Not to coat tails.
Millennial Miss fits?

Who knew what when...

...is still unclear and contradictory.
(Update became too long and windy so I overlap here)

<< Correcting an Impression (1): still confusion(2). My own missing (3) link.

Apparently $30 Billion latest AIG potential for drawdown has been caught in this confusion and is potential leverage. Who knew what when is still unclear and contradictory. >>

(1) "Congress last month passed a bill that President Obama signed into law, allowing AIG to keep its bonuses. For days, no one would say who was responsible for the loophole that let that happen.

The $787 billion stimulus bill included a measure from Dodd to limit executive bonuses strictly. But slipped inside at the last minute was an exemption for bonuses agreed to "on or before February 11, 2009." That allowed AIG to go ahead with its controversial bonuses."

(2) "Although Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner told congressional leaders on Tuesday that he learned of AIG's impending $160 million bonus payments to members of its troubled financial-products unit on March 10, sources tell TIME that the New York Federal Reserve informed Treasury staff that the payments were imminent on Feb. 28."

(3)"The federal government agreed Sunday night to provide an additional $30 billion in taxpayer money to the American International Group and loosen the terms of its huge loan to the insurer, which is preparing to report a $62 billion loss on Monday, the biggest quarterly loss in history, people involved in the discussions said."

<> Date of sources: (1)today 3-19 (2) yesterday 3-18 (3)Sunday 3-1-09 <>

Imagine the scenario that the market actually had the information clear. The above confusion occurred likely due to the compartmentalization* of information and actions needed to be taken over a weekend. I am still uncertain about the spurious charges of "hush money" in regards to the "retention" bonuses but it is difficult to expect too much transparency** in such market sensitive negotiations or even authoritarian (or mob rule) expectations for responsibility.***

* and filtering through various departments, committees and branches of the process, including the media
**this does not excuse the outrage over bonuses but the speed that was needed and
is in contrast to previous manipulations or administrations and telegraphing our blows.
***(not to mention "...rotisserie of meaning and values and what is being skewered or brings stock aid to mind.": see P.S. verse us alternatives )
[Yes I played with verses as opposed to stocks versus stockade mentality]

[Footnoted Outrage: Between the lines: Embedded and bottom line.
A.I.G. Using "Suicide Strategy" to Push Bonuses by: Matt Renner, t r u t h o u t | Report
Venality Bites by: Brian E. Gray, t r u t h o u t | Perspective A synergy of strategy and legality and antagonistic con fluency of Authoritarian and Mob Rule.]

Heading* To Be Determined Later

The Friday Priciple on Stair Oids(or Aster Risks).
Not to pun on High Tech or FP, but the press conference today...
[yesterday] the event

1. work with congress
2. perspective
3. transparency
4. technology (FP) review

[*] Lede or Ship [8-11-13]
 

Change in the Age of Schism[!]

Not to be disarming, but I did not want to use "insurgency", because it would relate to belligerency, as I had begun to wiki.  The field which I do not wish to alarm[!](pun on arm /disarm) is international relations in the age of transparency.  (to be continued**) relative to scholasticism nor go mid-evil.  Would that be olastic***?  Think Snowden/Soros v. not* exactly^^ neo-con.


[Links (asterisks) bold added 2-11-14]
*I don't think this was on my radar (25:00)
(31: 32:00 "crisis of authority" Howard Dean folks, 37:00 cure "municipal libertarianism" "conventional Rawlsian liberalism"? 38:00 )

** I've lost the inspiration^ for this
^ a few links that triggered the concept
^^ sort of the ticket

The sequence of inserts
not*, Twilight of the Elites
nor Philosophy 101 
that General Theory of Reflexivity

... A.Primary Boogeyman, B., C.AM Calm PACtification,

***last inserts (~48:~55? Left Burkian? )

Square This!

transparency X vested interest in truth

I'm saying, let's make an issue out of the law being able to be read and by whom.

Intelligence Gathering

Not to embed further footnotes,* but there is a heirarchy of globalism that is a reality.  Not to resort to labelism, but it is not as easy as "heirarchy" or "globalism" or branching of powers, but is a matter of transparency, pragmatism and incrementalism.

* 1st two links inserted later.
[even later Re: The Cycle & "cross referencing"*(OW)** ]
** anacronistic asterisks/links

2-8-13 Circular Filing?
(Not exactly preemptive, but only partially CONtemporary[!])

A Long Season of ...

what ?

MHP Tweeting into war?

Transparency ?
(sic) labels tba

Fear and Running

in the Republican Party. 
It could be said that the 1st Amendment of the constitution kills more than the 2nd Amendment.

Amendment 1-  Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Amendment 2-  A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

I was going to go with "gunning" instead of "running", but I did not want it to suggest* a 2nd Amendment solution.  But with Romney running on an ad that misunderstands English, that is only one bullet point to my argument.  "You didn't build that." is completely out of context**.  But out of context does not necessarily mean misleading.*** 

Post asterisks:  The impact of the first amendment on what gets done has more impact on life and death than the fallacy that anyone is going to kill the second amendment.[**]

* b.s. (blog search) to be footnoted
** (no pun on con text but I need to replace[*] the Daily Rundown links)
*** not to suggest (not exactly)
[*] close enough for blog work
[**] There are very constitutional reasons for the political calculus of this rhetoric to influence and create reality.  But from another dimention, NorMan GoldMan has a rhetorical rant (not not it) that could fit Romney's rhetorical style in a silly Obama ad that could decimate [***] the Romney race.
[***] Pardon the Palin term, but not her.

[Post bracketed asterisks: regarding the NG rant, "that" is not quite "it" but on target, in more ways than one.  But in appreciation of the nature of our progress, it is not about any new legislation.  It is not about obliterating the constitution or its amendments or even new amendments.  Old taxes and legislation are always on the table, for all three branches of government, and the people are the deciders. C-heading and lede!]

[Follow-up of sorts.  But first a note on "gunning" as a rhetorical term.  I'm sorry I can't give proper credit, but it may be embedded in the links above.  However, Lawrence O'Donnell, noting the Brian Williams interview of Romney was not my original follow-up, but may be on target (That is not a course.) Ouch.  Guns don't kill people, people do.  Find them(Ctrl F)? What about the law?  Not for the silly season, or gatlin salad?  And oh no, not atTax of the meta4rhetoric.  I really think there is a problem with the use of Senator Thelma for Patty Murray, since she puts Boehnor at the wheel.]
[Transparency Destroyed?]
[Re-sorts of sorts... sort of, or not, of course.  This was basically an exercise in logging some clips of some MSNBC shows.]

[My best to Wendy & Ed Schultz!]

[7-26-12: update and effect (label)]
[Scroll up to "Post bracketed"]

Para~graph Three!

Endo-terror~cism?

aka Academics ?

The point?  The esoterics of Strauss maybe the Socratics of Plato, or exoterics of Neitzsche.

Ctrl F (academic:~:academics)
:::  aka [a. FOOTNOTE JUNE 2013 PAGE TWO, b. The Daily Counter Balance , c.(J) In the begining... , (D)BoC, e. Belated Breaking News! , f. THE COUNCIL OF NICE , h. Back-Log August 19th, ("religious ghetto") , i.(G).]
:::   ? [a. Looking Back , b. "if I were dictator" , c. What's good for the goose? Goose the gander! , d. Bane(Or) Change , e. Conservative Foray (4A) ,  f. Blame to go around? , g. Will Safire Replaced by Will I ams., h. Academic Freedom , i. Framing Narratives , j. In the begining... , k. Technical Difficulties , l. The Thorn and the Lyin' , m. Running Joke , n. Let me finish? , o. We are at the table. , p.Forward (Ironically)  ]
(what the fudge?  f-j,p?)
:::   Endo-suffix?

The project  ?   The dance? 
"Esotericism is the practice, widely employed by a variety of thinkers prior to and up through the early Enlightenment, of disguising their real meaning through ellipsis, surface contradiction, dispersal of their real arguments, and the like (indeed—they were misleading casual readers about their true intentions!). The understanding that philosophers like Plato and Aristotle made use of esotericism was central to Strauss’s own project of returning to their thought as an antidote to what he called the “crisis of modernity”, since it pointed to deeper truths hidden behind the evident meaning extracted by superficial readers. It was probably also one of the sources of distrust of Strauss and his followers by other academics, since it implied that initiates into the art of esoteric interpretation had access to meanings unavailable to others." Francis Fukuyama.
Or Ecto~tonics of Aristotle?  Less than Ionic that paranormal came up in  English [?]
P.4,The Prince misquote? P.5 "undermine dogmatism" bingo~? P.6 Nietzsche Recurrance
"That latter struggle was ultimately won, and led to the triumph of the “harmonist” view, now almost universally accepted, that philosophical truth could be made compatible with and indeed supportive of modern politics. Transparency is today the name of that venerable game. Classical philosophers like Plato and Aristotle had a different view; namely, that philosophical skepticism undermined the irrational beliefs necessary to the maintenance of a political community and therefore needed to be kept under wraps. As Melzer points out, there is a large body of contemporary scholarship that actively contends that virtually no one other than a few cranks ever wrote esoterically; he performs a great service by, first, showing that the claim is empirically wrong, and second, that it is itself an historically contingent interpretation." (ibid.)
 
2-25-15 2 ~ B Kantinued ;-) R I P ? [!]
(1) a. Who Let the Dogs Out?, b. The Undisclosed Bunker Branch of the Government., c. ...what about the damage to your Presidency?, (d.) The Curve or Nuance Thing, e. Doxology.
(2)~
(3)  The Be All and End All?

Pen~ta-gone? i.e. P5
"This section of the book is wonderfully erudite and leaves no uncertainty that esotericism was indeed a major art that is now all but lost. Melzer points to four reasons for past uses of esotericism. First, it served as protection from prosecution; he notes its widespread use in totalitarian countries like the former Soviet Union and contemporary China. Second, it served to protect the political community from dangerous truths, such as philosophical skepticism about the city’s gods and traditions; third, it served a pedagogical purpose by forcing readers to engage on a deeper level; and fourth, it was used as a transitional strategy for modern writers seeking to undermine dogmatism." (ibid)
P6?  At this Platonic # I will note Aristotle's place in the Nietzschean struggle.  
Hence Fukuyama is a difficult read of Strauss and Plato who are difficult reads.

P7? "If Philosophy Between the Lines were simply a book..." (where P = par.) I might plow on[!]
@9   "Strauss’s central concern was what he called the 'crisis of modernity', where the project of using philosophical reason for practical purposes was in danger of collapse."
@12 "The recovery of the rationalist project was central to Strauss’s life work—"
Having now fully read it, I will let you decide.

Post-Posted

It is morning, Monday(~) and I have not found the Jared Bernstein reference on The Cycle.




INSERTS
M: Go Birds! ,  M: AC/DC ,
Jared Bernstein , r: Breaking Raven Systems 


Review of Footnotes Pages [!]*
*irony of italics (not Friday's)
Monday 12-1-14 The Un-Revolved(~) Thread , AsIMovian Principles.
Tuesday 12-2-14 War on Hillary[!]
Wednesday 12-3-14 Hump Day? , WOW 
Thursday 12-4-14 , WOW II (or 2) AC/DC
Friday 12-4-14 TGIF , Breaking Raven Systems
Thank Who for Transparency**?
Monday Morning Post Dated's: AC/DC , Go Birds!

** not exactly (FP1)
(~)ICBM : original M&M of Saturday/Sunday transposed.
Not to the point of the I Can't Breath Message, but family, friends, shopping and football (American traditions all)occupied my weekend. 
But the M-bedded point is the FYI of WTF or What the Ferguson of Filter your Intel(FP2).
There are two occasions that bridge this Reid: The pending release of a torture report and the failure to rescue a hostage. The Attorney General will be also looking into the use of special prosecutors, while the Rolling*** Stone has mossed an issue.

***(FP3)






To Gruber 12-9-14 NOW perfect pair?  The Gump for the Gumbo!

NSA: No Saviors Associated

Tin-Foil Teapot:

Beck's "Libertarian" Hero *(as he supposedly tweeted): "I think I have just read about the man for which I have waited. Earmarks of a real hero."

 

Ironically something that might bring the most extreme together, an agent of transparency who may just end the war on terrorism. Did I say ironic?

 

Is that not a "uniter" and a "hope and change", or bane or change?

(Belated Norm: Still Ticking ?)

*When are air quotes air quotes? 
[Not to be flu id butt...]
[Yikes ! ]

Framing Narratives

Don't even Think of an Elephant!

The Last Word

Game Change

The Rachel Maddow Show

The gist of this riff?

The impact of whine and geez!

Walk** Like an Egyptian!*

[3-14-12 asterisks added ]

[ "I feel like I can say anything[!]..." NOT!***]

*It is ironic that Betty Knox went on to be a war correspondent.

** U.S. Autumn

*** an example of spin: former quote actually in latter link.

(Excuse me for the cross threads, no pun on mean [!])

(warning under "anything" (maybe)requires Facebook membership)

[Not to pun on Dead C Scrolls, but I hope there are no cross ups(2) in my links.]

[Oops, see comments, and cartoon.]

[Re: Market Forces]

[Re: Comments ! ]

[Re: never mind N-FRY.]

Under "never mind" I have now read the latter and the former maybe later. The "mind" is a very academic place. The "never" a more pragmatic problem under the umbrella of our creators. Whether I ever get to read the "git mo" piece may be irrelevant. The point germinates from our "Try Angle" and the dilemma of transparency and the dangers of ab-solutions. (pun on absolutes) [I don't think absolute freedom of information is possible, let alone pragmatic. But the emphasis it on "absolute", as well as a careful reading of our architectural documents, which I believe lay the organic groundwork for progress, as opposed to Jeramiahs(^). Critics of the president must realize that he is responsible whether Congress frames the right tools or the Global Village (let alone Supreme Court) goes along. Yet I am still digesting James Fallows take here, where ultimately it is our choice to choose forward or Re-verse. C- Elephant (3)]

(^) 3-16-12 spell check Jeremiah

(Original: synonym for pessimists, not to pun on prophetic hope.)

The fourth dimension.

Politics confirmed this week.

Pragmatism, Incrementalism, Transparency
and Peas...

Peas? 
or OW?
& 4~M...

1. a #1 Discipline - Philosophy, b. , c CPS, d. Darned if you do, darned if you don't...

DOEE (Dept. of Everything Else)

Thomas Barnett [***] YouTube presentation
The Pentagon's new map for war and peace

A friend sent me this, very optimistic, and saw it as so non-political. Fine. How does this come about? How do we create a "New Leviathan" albeit, calling it "New Everything Else"? This is fine as long as we realize it is political or it is the same old thing, otherwise know as the battle between realism and idealism.

Transparency and secrecy do have their distinct applications,(especially in war and diplomacy) but accountability and rules are in the getting there. (Power is not good or evil only results are and even they are seen from more than one perspective.)

A-to-Z rules focused on dealing with everything? How does one get them? Of course that is not the idea. Excusing based on result, is that the excuse? Hmmm. He has some good metaphors. Networking force? Where does it start? Where does it end? Security? Funny?

I think that he has some good points, but it all could be hinged on a point the world would love to get to, and they would all love to be there, to be the decider. I do not minimize the need for something, and he points to many good ideas to separate expertise and responsibilities, but I would emphasize that there is much more to talk about that may need the same (or better) analysis. There is a "heckuva" lot of work getting the world to see that there is somehow going to be a "new world order", no matter who brings it about and what it is brought about for. And there is no denying the current balance of powers and just wishing or demanding or excusing them away.

This is a good approach for the military, the rest may be everything else. Including looking at how we came to learn this lesson and whether it was already plain to too few.

Having viewed the video several times, I am rather encouraged about his approach, as long as it is taken as broadly and evolving as he intends it. In that regard there are some weaknesses in his rhetoric when it comes to the U.N., the World Bank, the G20 and what he calls the Kantian[*] world. In what I call the outcome and the input or more broadly the rules and the process, we probably need more than bifurcation. He has separated force from administration, and it is in the latter that more work and input may be needed. In that regard I will hold up for now and provide a template that has been suggested more immediately and specifically for the mess we are in, due to some of this thinking not being applied in the first place. A Responsible Plan to End the War in Iraq. **

[*] uncertain what his Kantian world is,
here are a few of my Kantian references:
Fearnauts
The Council of Nice
** Thanks to the "hard work" of Darcy Burner and what I call her Pentagon of Principles.

[***] earlier link to Barnett