OH REALLY FOG

OH REALLY FOG. "Labeling U.S. as terrorist is anti-American."
Does Bill O’Reilly take credit for that as the title of his piece?

Labeling is where we have a problem. It is a shortcut that is very American. Unfortunately, both terrorist and anti-American are labels. Some definition someone sticks on others so they don’t have to use definitions or worry about their instability or inconsistencies. Terrorist is a word that has several definitions and American even more. Anti-American can probably have no less. Propaganda has a few definitions of its own. And when words are tossed about, things can get pretty sloppy and cruel. Given the flexibility in these definitions one could almost say anything, and not know what it really means. But I am pretty sure your attack itself is just as un-American, if being American means being concerned about defining our words and actions.

But signing on to a group need not be as much as you think, when you think most people know what you state is only implied.

Now that I have read more about Not in our Name and the transcript from your show, let me know if they have misquoted you, but it makes me even more furious. In fact I may be as furious as you are. Not only are you the propaganda, but what you are so upset about is your own doing. Not only do you misconstrue their ad, you can’t even comprehend what people like them are talking about. In particular, when you confuse/compare the sympathy NION has for the deaths of anyone, with your comparing of the actions of the suicidal bombers with the reasonable goals in Kuwait and Panama. If you are the NO SPIN ZONE, not only can’t handle spin, you don’t know the meaning of spin. I really liked your take on the FOG of history. That is really where you are coming from and where you are going. At least the people you disparage have names whether they have control of the complete message or not, unlike the ones too afraid to be labeled as consultants in the Cheney Energy panel, that is O’Reilly American.

By the way, I never found the mentioned ad on your site, nor on their site. But hopefully I have fairly dealt with what you did say. Any attempt to link people with groups that they are not necessarily aware of is much less significant than Cheney not wanting to be linked to those who he would consult with, not to mention your fog.

Why can you not see the insanity in your thinking? Now it is clear, Oh really. It is the fog of history you are in and out of. That and the theory: the enemy of my enemy is my friend. It also saves one from needing to have principles. The enemy of my enemy is my friend applies very strangely. If one is not the enemy of your enemy they must also be your enemy. No wonder it’s hard for us to have friends. With people working for peace and progress it poses a catch-22. With others it is safer to just have enemies. It is also no wonder some would rather arm themselves then trust the government. Why can’t you see that opposing violence is different than choosing sides, and dissension and or protest not in the same league as war or un-principled violence?

[Update: 2-13-12 labels and links]

Genre Clash

or Mutation?

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





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

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

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

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

[1-28-11 Update]

Dividing Not Uniting

[Held in draft since 6-12-09]

Republican Study Committee needs more study.
While some factions blame Obama for bailouts, another blames him for not standing with holdouts for a bailout.

Meanwhile Palin starts a war on comedy as an expert on double standards. What started as a reasonable admonition to David Letterman who made a disparaging joke that did implicate her under aged daughter, soon bordered on pandering violence. While this is a big stretch from Letterman not wanting to be caught "off guard", it is more innuendoed than the error of the joke(which daughter) distracting from its original distastefulness(to daughters in general*). Now will Palin go after Death Talkers or will Letterman go more political shock jock or start a blog?

It is my opinion that Letterman should apologize for the jokes erroneous implication and the overall distastefulness of the subject.[**] Then Palin should work on her fellow partisans and "so-called" conservative "leaders", be they elected or sponsored in their "free" speech; in particular surrounding the improper use of words like socialism and racism and the irony and empathy of Alaskan ownership of resources. If she could make as good a showing with her "so-called" friends, it would be a service to her party and the nation.

* the original distastefulness was more standard fare for late night yet the error aside, other exaggerations have been made in making this an issue about women.[These two links were found and inserted after I finished this post. But I think there is a general hazzard in communication that transcends humor or could actual be a key ingrediant that is often missed. If one takes the word "slutty" and recognizes it as an adjective and not part of the noun, one might not be so quick to empathize as a victim.] [late read]

[**] to a great extent he has, but I mean acknowledging the error and not unreasonable offense taken by the daughter actually at the game (at least until it was made "hey" of)

[Later 6-15-09 follow-up Letterman Boost and word out that Letterman will re-apologize.]
[6-16-09: Palin accepts apology and evolution.]
[Further RE:Devolution On CBS]

Cherry paraphrasing.

The Seattle Times editorial today titled: Kerry's right to slam the president on Iraq.(see link) I agree when they say his Iraq vote and recent claim was "... not a 'flip-flop.' It is sensible and consistent."

However I might feel like a flip-flopper if I disagree with a Kerry statement. It takes too much nuance to separate from Bush.
Kerry: "The terrorists are beyond reason. We must destroy them. As president, I will do whatever it takes, as long as it takes, to defeat our enemies."

Then Domke and Coe had their column, Bush's fundamentalism: the president as prophet.
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/opinion/2002043481_domke23.html
They conclude "To the great detriment of American democracy and the global public, the president's view looks remarkably similar to that of the terrorist we are fighting."

The "beyond reason" part of Kerry now clicks. It does not mean that reason will be part of the nothing* that Bush claims to be above. Terrorists or anyone beyond reason cannot negate the consideration of what got them there. The words chosen are important to some. For some there is cause and effect, for some it seems out of the blue. Being above or beyond reason does not mean it does not still work in some reality. To some there may be no space between the two candidates, but for one thing Kerry will be no Bush.

We have come a long way from the George who chopped down the cherry tree to George the cherry picker of realities. From the one that turned down a crown, to the one that joked that things would be easier if he were dictator, we now have the comment by the Iraqi leader we should not be having a debate at this time. It does not say much for our recent exporting of democracy. The earlier dismissal of old Europe as our allies says more about our listening to others and now we have new friends telling us about democracy. Who elected them by George?

It seems that there is a Catch 22 here. Times two equals Catch 44. It seems inside out of sorts but the President put it best roughly on intelligence. You got this over here and that over there and more and then you got reality. It should be easy to see why being in charge he must just say, make it so.

* see previous "nothing" post (also I acknowledge this difficult sentence but what about Bush's here. http://blog.seattletimes.nwsource.com/betweenthelines/archives/2004_09_23.html#005342
(A rare case of him meaning what he said, but he did miss the question. Ironically also the topic inserted with in this piece, and he never checks polls, what about votes?)

Then we have an acknowledgement by Rumsfeld that some areas may not vote in Iraq. Sounds familiar. The media is not presenting the good news, because it is unsafe for them to be there, but imagine not being able to hold elections in the capital. Oh. Good model. Times two. It's just getting too much.

Enemy of the Good.

Perfect?
NOT, but with quotations or even their marks? None.
Nonetheless, "good" is found there.

This little ramble demonstrates
that the enemy is not anecdotes or metaphors,
but where one can get lost...
"Dot, Dot, Dot" --- anecdotes and metaphors*

I've been lost in email exchanges,
But good can be found in the bad.
Not necessarily that it is right.

I've been there before maybe in Candide.

HAPPY FOURTH OF JULY!

We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

Now to possibly un-lose you or re-lose you, if you are not lost in the middle of this; the point of perfect **? Not reality but a goal, out there. Not that metaphors are all wrong, nor words just right or even just enough. Just where is the bold lost and the rest just left behind?

*Perspectives and world views
** was in the search of my Perfect(question/mark)above, technical capabilities depend on exactness, only the word "good" was found and much more in the result, but limited to the quote it searched for not found to be used. That is just one aspect of the manipulative capabilities of the mind, let alone the needs of proper usages of technology, not to mention punctuation and grammar of which I am far from perfect in. Oh and I would like to thank some far from perfect friends and some not so clearly not enemies for this progress. Oh, and I don't want to continue this dance not that limbo is not a good metaphor, for not bending over backwards and being be too PC by avoiding biblical and cultural connotations to our preemptive natures.