Lessons of War

From a less than left writer David S. Broder no less:
The costs of carrying on in Iraq and Lebanon
"The point is that history and economics have their own logic".

As noted before(I will have to find where)economics may be more a factor in history and war than winning. (Well, I never put it that way exactly.) There are those that ignore the importance of economics in reality(as in all the various fields or disciplines of study), but do tend to focus on just a winning economy. That may be a little closer to the point, and if not even less understood.

Here are two examples: a.) We are now doing business with Vietnam. Versus not with North Korea. b.) Reagan's words tore down the Berlin Wall, or Afghanistan broke the Soviet Union.

Again it may not be clear to those that see winning a military war as the only way to win. Money is power, but not everybody wins.

War is hard work. Peace is hard work. Facing realities is hard work.
Enough from me, before I give you more hard work.

By the way. "You break it, you bought it." comes to mind. Besides that fact that pottery bard[*] does not have that policy, I don't know if a point has been made that it is misquoted as "You break it, you own it".
{Use Ctrl f to find each quote in each article) Many do not want to face who pays.

[* 8-19-10] Noting typo

First Sources

It is a beautiful Monday, Stephanie Miller is on the radio. France attempts a turn from austerity.^^
[Really... Click on in"F"ables(see**) at your own risk.]
Guest Eric Boehler of Media Matters and other* in"F"ables.**
President Obama takes his gloves off*** and Ron Paul is another matter.
Not[!][?]

*killing 2brds with one asterisk (the "other" link has nothing to do with Stephanie Miller)
But the next link is not for the Right thinking.
** More than you might want to hear by Live Free Funny or Die.
Scroll over for insufficient warning.
*** First Read (two videos) Framing 2012

Note [?] @Not[!] = Churned Media
[Winning?  Backward? Mitt-Flop ?  (see two videos ***)]
[Not^ the bottom line! (see comments/hints)NFRY]

^confidence fairies ?

[Not such a large leap?!] Knot! Really it is.
^^ L8 link

Update: 5-8-12 Martin Bashir
Ed Schultz on Mitt Flop [!][?] Really! Really? And Lastly.

5-9-12 Charles Johnson
One person's Mitt-Flop ~ is another's Physics~ of Nuance.
~ Duality / Noncausality

Swiftboating of McCain?

As I pointed out the term needs adjustment.
And I "really" dislike the headline US News and World Report uses:
New York Times Drops Bomb On McCain and forgotten?
MEDIA FIREWORKS: MCCAIN PLEADS WITH NY TIMES TO SPIKE STORY by The Drudge Report.
Not that I have fully read these, but this:
For McCain, Self-Confidence on Ethics Poses Its Own Risk is worth the read and fits in with the image management that needs exposure.
Hence the term Swiftboating should not be used as that was a campaign of misinformation, while FlipFlopperKrafting provides double exposure.

[O'Reilly "Lynching Party" is really a Fox Hunt. Media Matters is Hard Work]

[2-22-08 Flip-Flopper-Crafting? I still like the "K". But I will amend the comment to note that often headlines are sensational, yet The New York Times understated the issues "For McCain..."

“Unless he gives you special treatment or takes legislative action against his own views, I don’t think his personal and social relationships matter," said Charles Black, a friend and campaign adviser who has previously lobbied the senator for aviation, broadcasting and tobacco concerns.

and a more direct headline "No Public Funds for McCain" from Politico has an interesting bottom line that is well summarized in the last few paragraphs.

But even if the commission were meeting, one must wonder if the panel -- an organization that decided the cost of field organizers doesn’t need to be added to the overall cost of winning a state primary -- would tell the Republican Party that its nominee can’t slip through a newly carved loophole and arm himself for battle against a significantly better funded and unrestricted Democratic nominee.]

Spoiler Alert!

Not Really[!]

Four words could not do more for context and con tent. Ron Paul is doing for the Republicans, what Obama can't do for the country. Ron Paul winning over "Values Voters" is almost a sign of some "reality"*, if not unity. The Obama strategy is more "real" in the context of divided goverment. i.e. branches not parties (not to mention the pinnacle of the tetrahedron)

* or some "sense"

FOOTNOTES PAGE DECEMBER 2013

Begun 12-3-13

12-1-13:(sc) math problem un4m~ulated. (NFRY)
12-2-13(cont.) Too Random... Righty? 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 (the point ?)
[4 the record : 3 squared? ]
12-3-13: Parallel [!] un-Pink Floyd, He- /^\ , van-NO JOKE, ven-Rough Philosophy, Cry- / Star Chamber Revisited, river- / creek ? 

rtd 12-3-13

Retrieved from draft 12-13-13
State Theory <- heading // lede -> and duality // trinity/body  Headings and^ Leadership*. (dynamics)
  ^    of/or 8:  Snooze/Dream(4,6) *prof(it)C? (7,8) Bane or Right?  [Not to blog both ends against the middle.]
Don’t celebrate yet!: Why Boehner won’t really ditch the right-wing nutjobs. /  The Christian right wants civilization to collapse / (3/5) Head ~ Lead Paul Krugman: The GOP’s austerity agenda is winning / My critics have “income envy”: Ed Schultz unloads after backlash to his union quote 
Dual / nd: When will the media learn? Conservatives are not “centrists”! / 3 essential (and ignored) questions about Detroit’s bankruptcy  Try Ad of Caution?  (not fully read yet) (anachronistic construction) (duel conflation)~ (bc: bubble critics)  OW Hegel ~ Liebniz [!]
RTD


12-23-13 (4) A.  Rubric's Cube and Rhetorical Realmifications., B. What's good for the goose? Goose the gander! c. Snooze Alarm d. Tony Baloney e. WWW Wisconsin Lesson? f. We Need Ed  g, What's good for the goose...

12-27-13 
12-28-13 1 Was Wittgenstein Right? or behind [?^] 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 ... 9  // 10 / 11
^ insert a - h
12-29-13 - Original 5 links.  A. Frank O File? B. Pi cAP Delta rOW(USC) C. 1. Inverse Reality?,  2.(i), 3. Fair and Balanced..., D. Wittgenstein , E. Re-Mix  ///
12-30  F.rough- 1. Punderous Ponderings , 2. State of Politics , 3. A Revolution? 4.Un-Exceptionalism 5.  , G.notes^ -1. 2.Heuristic Concurrence and  3.My Respects to Those who Celebrate. (re-search*) , H.math^^ - 1. Too Random... , 2., 3.Bury the lede?, 4. ROW MAN #Sign [Numeral (i)] . *(under the case of not fully read yet, but back to math... why now 16?  too cubed by two? Speculation that the 5th perspective is from apart too pun? The three-body problem regards intitial circumstances from within or without. R 1st 3 models different than recently added.  The pow#r of i(V)?

ROF, WOF

Ring of Fire

War on Freedom!

Rough Comments:

BBBB

Better Business Beyond Bull!

Or Bush!

Tale Gating !

[I may have forgotten the original excuse for the BB acronym. It was not the Buffet Bureau, and I am not sure** of (yet to find) the Ring of Fire links from this weekend(as I jotted down the above thoughts yesterday), which may have triggered the wag*on Freedom.]

* Republicans Repeal Beatitudes?

** sure: Occupy Movement

not: Mortgage Fraud Settlement (or vice verse us)

[Yes the wag is war on freedom. Woof? (on or?) War on/or freedom? Wag the Woof? Yes, Freedom is wagged as a word, but the effects are farther*** from freedom.]

*** It seems that Rick Santorum has raised nuance to a parsing of religious and economic freedom.

[NOW with Alex Wagner: Ari Melber sitting in on six months of OW.]

[Andrea Mitchell, Eva Longoria and American Progress .]

[Martin Bashir: Oil Fabrication, and Culture War.]

[Hard Ball,"Wow, it's getting too sophisticated." through 3-and-a-half men and Winning!]]

Give 'em a break!

New Arkansas GOP (Republican) State Chairman Milligan

He said he’s "150 percent" behind Bush on the war in Iraq.

"At the end of the day, I believe fully the president is doing the right thing, and I think all we need is some attacks on American soil like we had on [Sept. 11, 2001 ], and the naysayers will come around very quickly to appreciate not only the commitment for President Bush, but the sacrifice that has been made by men and women to protect this country," Milligan said.

This is a legitimate rhetorical technique. HOWEVER, It does not work the way it was even intended.
Obviously the intention was not that "we need" another attack but that if there was, "the naysayers will come around". HOW? Not unless the thinking was as twisted as those that miss the rhetorical intention in the first place. If there were another attack, why would anyone say, "See, it's working", when the point they are trying to make is that if it were not for everything they are doing, there would be another attack.

Now this leaves alot of the argument off the table, but here is a point that has been left off the table. I hope it is in this hour of The Ed Schultz Show, (it has his take on the debate anyway) but the point was from a caller. How is it that Bush gets credit for protecting our country after the biggest failure since Pearl Harbor? (that is not how the caller put it, but I usually improve or extend points) SEE LINK and Control Find Pearl and check the names there. But his point was that given the warning the new Bush administration had from the Clinton administration about terrorist attacks, they still occurred.

A recent quote from Nietszche I heard- - "If the end doesn't justifies the means, what does?"- - is another rhetorical mind field (mine?) Bush actually said "the end doesn't justify the means", but left off "what does". Power or winning, may be the end but the former is the means to anything, so if power is end and the means, it may only be the end. OK, that is a trickier mine field. Not that it is not how it works, whether you can follow it or not. But back to Nietszche or rather the mind field that got us here. Francis Fukuyama was in the crowd that plowed the field and half regrets it. Now these are even deeper minds, and yes I flip flop from mine to mind, and have not read these last three yet, but I had already tiptoed through others. Or rather I have actually read Fukuyama's apology as well as Huntington's work that addressed even more, and both .* were simply taken as CON text, meaning wrong

Not to be sorted out here, but maybe later.

* Their work, not these pieces.

Their work:
Clash of Civilizations Read
The End of History Did not read.

Six-edged Rhetoric.

Not just to continue a theme,(a likely coincidence)
but it involves the dynamics of progress,
and I don't mean the apparently belated addition(see scrollover v. lede).

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.


Note: Said Relief and labels/associations Slash Segue...
criss-cross aside of more Williams
William Harvey
William of Occom

[*] This is not the link but Norman Goldman did refer to LEX of the FT about relative tax rates(or revenues/GDP)(nor is this it, but... )

Whining to Win.

First it was about the economy and from a McCain advisor, then it was about the media. Actually quite a bit transpired in between. But the image thing, composite or not, should be compared to The Dean Scream. Actually I am not attributing Deans loss to his scream, but it was a turning point and cover for the media turning. While the light that McCain is cast in, should be examined more carefully, not to mention Palin.

As misinforming as the position Pro-Life is, maybe a better bumper sticker would be Pro-Baby. Whining begins at conception.
Or maybe: Baby First!

[Speaking of winning expressions that is: See The View as contexted here, and watch the first video of him under fire for his ads. Talk about getting caught with your hand in the cookie jar and blaming the baby, or is it the bath water.

[9-17-08: The above was posted before a caller to The Thom Hartmann Show, [*] noted some research backup for my anecdotal unRoveing.]
[In my opinion the easy dismissal of studies by one side of the ideological spectrum, defines the spectrum. One side defines the parameters to study, the other attacks the study to define their way. It could be described as "might makes right" while meaning gets left behind. A point that may have been neutrally arrived at by one critic. "So next time, give 'em something to really cry about."]
[*]: yesterday's caller but again today: the above amendments were posted prior to today's show begining on the topic of smear or coverage - In discussion with the author a reference to Caesar's work(not his words but mine and McCain's), places it as the foundation of our country, while apparently the press has become a fifth column.

Minimum Wage Resources

http://www.epi.org/publication/importance-study-design-minimum-wage-debate/

http://journalistsresource.org/studies/economics/inequality/the-effects-of-raising-the-minimum-wage



http://www.nber.org/papers/w12663.pdf?new_window=1

https://www.cbo.gov/publication/44995

http://americanactionforum.org/insights/what-the-weight-of-minimum-wage-research-shows

https://www.facebook.com/eddiegilchrist/posts/10208542946436436

https://www.facebook.com/raiseourwage/photos/a.1676792199227347.1073741828.1672542002985700/1681523792087521/?type=3&theater

http://evonomics.com/no-one-knows-why-trump-is-winning/



http://evonomics.com/economist-debunks-one-of-the-biggest-myths-about-governments/
http://evonomics.com/apes-make-irrational-economic-decisions-that-includes-you/

http://www.msnbc.com/the-last-word/watch/what-wrecked-scotus-nominations-623482435586
http://www.rawstory.com/2016/02/rachel-maddow-breaks-down-how-badly-the-us-needs-a-full-supreme-court-going-into-the-election/

Enough?

The McCain introduction of Palin was coming out fighting under the banner of Country First. The Maverick reticent to talk about his service led with a one two punch. First it was about contributions then it was about his service. But it may not be all about him. Anyway, hopefully the American people have had enough, to know it is all about power first. Not to put a spin on it, but he is all about guts. Breaking news has it that the vetting process was finished on Wednesday. That that was when Palin came clean on some new details, which could not derail his guts or whomever put him up to this last minute decision. Meanwhile between pre and post just where is the maverick? Not to mention stranger than fiction Rove?

The breaking news above link is quite scary if accurate, and puts to rest all of my concern about what was enough or have I gone too far. In breaking it, Chris Mathews threw in the matter of luck that sent Rachel Maddow and Pat Buchanan at each other. While Rachel was getting at the roll of the dice so to speak which McCain has thrown,(not her words), Buchanan was saying that all that mattered was if it works for the ticket. Which must mean that it really is about winning first, not about country first.

And finally this.

The Hope'd4 Campaign

Or U-Turn Around.

The Romney campaign was trickling down beyond the pail, when Congressional Budget Chair Paul Ryan was selected as the VP candidate.  The watch word is turn around.  If it can't turn around its own rhetoric, wait... I am lost in a logical cul de sac.  Lies, I mean.  It needs to turn around its lies or it cannot turn around the country.  I recognize the irony of not being able to turn around its lies or they would not have a campaign against President Obama.  Much has been made by Romney about broken promises by the president, about not turning around the country.  Politics comes in three shades.  There is the politics of getting things done, there is the politics of partisan ideals, and there is the politics of winning a race.  I like the geometry of it.  But there is the darker shade of pail.  The outright not being able to run on the record. 

[update]
[Hardball: That's the Ticket, Not Saving VP Ryan. (E. W. ) Romney was for the Ryan Plan before he was against the Ryan Plan.  Is it a share 'n angle?  As VP Biden takes on Ryan, he will run from his past to confuse the Romney plan.  ]

One of my readers

if there is more than one, is concerned about my communications.
Note Under Construction label. I agree, it is problematic at times and heavy in links to say the least.

Fair and Balanced News? is a link directing to The Daily Show.

That is called Ledership you can choose to follow.(The FOX NEWS motto versus Comedy Central as a news source.)

Debt is a Red Herring, is a statement and a link and spins from here:

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

The rest is context and more sources, which may merit more spin and unembedding here: segment,the club of association)

If you don't get it you maybe out foxed.

Nonetheless i will further comment on some of the above links.
Club: The Norman Goldman 4-Point Plan to Rescue America
Association Lawrence O'Donnell, Dennis Kucinich interview about Tea Party coordination.
More: Randi Rhodes interviews Ron Paul
Spin: It is hard to believe Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker could be outed by prank, as puppet of Tea Party Sugar Daddy David Koch.
And back to O'Reilly interview of Beck, it completes a circle. The democracy that means the so-called communists and fundamentalists Beck says will be at the table in Egypt will be practiced in some repects in America and there will be uprising against the crony capitalism of Governor (Mubarak)Walker.
[2-24-11 See Comment and added footnotes in the form of the last two links embedded.]
[Late find of Lawrence O'Donnell v. Beck: tangent out ]

Sad Passing of Sen. Scott White

This was difficult ledership, in wording the heading of this post. Friday night there was the shocking news of the death of Washington State Senator Scott White. He was a long time colleague from the King County Democratic Central Committee. I believe he was there when I returned to district politics, in reaction to the impeachment of Bill Clinton. In 2008 we were proud of his success for winning a seat as a Representative in the State legislature, followed in 2010 by a successful Senate race. But more admirable was the job he did and the way he related to us all. He will be missed, not just as one of us, but as an impact player in the state.

Turning Tables

The 1% Doctrine flip-flopped. Obama follows through on Bush Cheney SOFA agreement? Seemingly proof that winning was not the goal.

And I wondered about anachronisms*. It is deeply rooted in the Republican race in terms of when it is flip-flop and when it is true change.

* Two pulled from draft, As (almost)Is, in context.

Simon says 2 point or...?

2 the N'th of infinity.




Simulphile:
A: The Hill on Benghazi-gate.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f .
g .*
h .
i .

j .

...

Z:  Stench to the N'th.

* preemptive asterisk speaking of ...
(Work in progress A-G-Z, not to Simonize but to file for later.)

To pre-paraphrase or Simon-eyes.  Will Romney have a debate winning joke? 
Will the Republicans in congress do to foreign policy what they have to the economy? 
Choose partisanship uber politics?**

[Footnotes under construction, meanwhile rolling blog search:  Bully Pour-Mitt, or ...  (7-4 to 6-6 )]

**[10-2-12] Thanks to my Bane or Tan Gents, I almost forgot the punchline. Will an attempt at humor have us laughing with Romney or at Romney?  Of course might be directed at Obama but will it be with us or against us?  I can't rule out self-depricating humor but I don't think that will really help him given his etch-a-sketch leaks.  But Walking like an Egyptian Bush will not really do any of us any good. 

NOW: Exception to the Rule?  Fox / Hedge-hog metaphor? (Nate Silver) Not to parse(hyphenate) a pun on hedgehog, nor out FOX the chicken-hawks.  

[I'm not sure I would suggest to the President pinning the V(for victim) on the Robbin'Hoods, but pinning the C (for compromise) on the Dawn Keys might work with almost anything regarding economics.  So try to nail the tale on the pool cue or magic 8 ball.] 
(fn)  [post footnote: Andrea Mitchell Reports Robert Gibbs on the math.]

Courage to be...

taking a test.

Is it the right test? Who is tested?
Who makes the test?...Actually?

"Is there courage there? Is there boldness there? Is there ability to think outside of the box?" - Wilson Goode, Sr., Former Mayor of Philadelphia
Not exactly the questions for the test, but already demonstrated, by the way.

"They have to demonstrate the courage to be lonely. The courage to understand that they may be making a decision that no one will understand, no one will like, and few will respect." - Andrew Card, Former Chief of Staff of Pres. George W. Bush
Not exactly even questions, but nonetheless demonstrated, by the way.

Could the media pass the test? Or are they passing the buck? Will we pick it up?

McCain: "would rather lose a campaign than lose a war"

Obama: "not interested in a false choice"

The parsing the test problem?
What about* the blue book approach?

* I have yet to filter all these tests, but it seems that McCain is taking Andrew Card's advice. And I come now to the final line that ties this up:
"But, the article may have done more for the campaign without being published than it ever could have if it was." That seems to be the McCain strategy, perform poorly and blame the coverage. While it is mistakes that often get more coverage, whining is not winning, but it plays the refs. The irony in the rejection of McCain's piece may be balanced by the error in his parsing by CBS.

[And my own parsing is tested: "It is what it is". Just an update.]

Speaking of "global" ** and one for the books, who writes this stuff. (And I was going to note anachronism)

** Having read the speech Obama took it to the wall [... see bumped up material to next post]

Thank G-D for GW!

Speaking of Cherry Tree.

[note: must update* hatchet BS]

[Note lack of link to GWB in current campaign, yet...]

(hint: the bottom line is the important link in the last link)

* this link's 1st two links are expired, yet are currently mysteriously prophetic**. (See "hatchet" for MSNBC proxy for what Xfinity currently links to.)

** I truly cannot be sure what those missing links were, but here are more recent possibilities.

[update: found proxies]

[Although George W. Bush is no George Washington, we may have him to thank for bursting our bubble economy***.]

*** Stiglitz

[mana from / the field : OK, these are lame leaps. Forbes predicts that Obamacare will not be overturned. See "Money" line 4. / See Thom @ "*" there and continued re:ALEC and BS.]

[BTW: Toure's Turn^: The New Jim Crow fits right into this Good Old Progress. For reference we have the War on Drugs, started when? When we were winning it in the early Reagan Administration. Happy Good Friday!^^ ]

^ yet to link

^^unexpected link

(And MS on Hardball is real zinger.^^^)

[Politics Nation: Raw Money Clash, it is not Harvard that is the problem but the Faculty Lounge.]

^^^ Winter/Spring Trending Fall Flexibility and the Big Zipper.

{Rachel Maddow shoots up War on Drugs: Republican declares Ronald Reagan unpatriotic[!]}

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]

The Challenge?

A legend for the Road map.[**]
[1-26-11 Update Dated below]

Are we there yet?
Pit Stops or Rest Stops?
Don't just spin our wheels.
Not that the squeaky wheel doesn't...
locating progressive perspectives may be in need of a key.

[Walking the line...w/Sam Stein, a tangent of empathy or introspection or straddling it with w/Paul Krugman, or neo-alterior line?*]

* there is some cognitive dissonance in this; America as a business, the private FED, and not just to pun on read or black [updated]

[** 1-25-11 Not exactly a huge effort to find the Republican Health care plan [Plan] but... here is more of a reply all, to the challenge, thanks to Rachel Maddow.]
[Not exactly up to the challenge above, nor exactly pro-rated, but still pre-speech... the challenge was the sources and keys to them, and it seems the media is not really up to the challenge or it takes more hard work. However, part of the challenge is the political nature of the media itself***. While attention has been given to a third so-called party within a party as a reply to the State of the Union, where is the so called Left? The Republicans have divided themselves to conquer so to speak, is there a voice let alone plan from the left in there, other than the pundits of lean forward? Or is Obama the Middle Bear's porridge? Just right.]

*** follow-upHowever: a turn spike.

[1-26-11 UPDATE: but just a hunch, as I pause the video, as the applause is still rolling, as the President enters the chamber, in the Welcome to the Enhanced State of the Union, the point is immediate: Winning The Future. Competition and Foreign Policy will not be foreign to Coordination.]