The Stick and the Carrot? POWER OF WILL?

Let Senator Spectre speak, and Senator Feingold carry the stick. The stick is the carrot that fills the will.

THANK YOU, RACHEL MADDOW
[ a tangent from her view of Spectre, as "speaking strongly and carrying a tiny stick" and the metaphor came to my usage today, on the whole gang, but here is what may be better filter in my search, not necessarily an endorsement , but a great idea: Even the counter intelligence can leak a point, meaning you cannot sue the president, but you can Impeach, subject dropped, but you can sue departments, and they are adding a crew there now.]

There is no one decider. There are three branches of government and the law is in the hands of the legislative with the power of the purse and war. The great decider may be above, but the great interpreter is not just the judiciary. Justice and the law must be above all, and we are all under it. To heck with the geometry, but is the will of the people, despite what will has been flip flopped. Not that any people are above the law, but must be part of the higher goal than just the process, or just below the process.

So speak softly and carry a big stick, but do not speak of the stick, but consider the carrot, if you talk preemption it is too late.

GWB: Global Warning Bull [do not misread: Warning, with an NNNNNNN!] * See Comment by me.
This portion is a tangent returned to from the arc above.
Congress investigates MisLeaders[Thank you, Waxman]
Here is the "be all and end all" from a Re:Cycler (aka: Deceivers Institute).
The point? Being. Not the end all or who peers over who.

Air America Radio - Moving On!

Buyer Found
Al Franken Leaving
Joe Liebermann Independent

Congratulations Air America Radio for finding a buyer, Al for his contributions past and future and Joe for not jumping on a bandwagon. (my attempt to relate to something) Stephanie for waking me up, and Thom Hartmann for getting Al's Air

Thanks to Air America Radio and the Stephanie Miller Show on AM1090
She woke me up to checking into 2 out of the 3 as I recall.

Kucinich Lays Out Anti-War Strategy Just a tangent from out of the blue.
Actually thanks to the Liebermann link and Yahoo! and yes Stephanie "he has a plan".
Or rather yes George, "he has a plan". Edwards Down, Hillary - Up 2? <-Vilsack not. Meaning Edwards and Vilsack are taking more forceful approaches and Kucinich has a plan and Hillary is being pragmatic. Now force is not the problem but context is, especially in anything on the road to the last resort. Politics is hard work, diplomacy harder, mixing them the trick without flip-flop. Some of these positions may need more unfiltering of the nuance involved as media filters tend to, by nature of the word "filter", segment. But preemption can not work without furthering preemption of all, and it would be better to clarify a position and change when needed.

Out of Line? "Hogwash"

Cheney with Wolf Blitzer is on course. McCain and Cheney must stay the course so that the rest have a line to hit and run from. [The Situation Room]

[submitted from an email exhange]

... looking into the matter more fully myself. [Watch Cheney's response to questions about his daughter] I'm afraid I can't characterize the players the way others would.

[[ I "fundamentally disagree" with Cheney, and agree with Wolf that it was a "reasonable, fair question." It was a poorly framed question ending with, "Do you want to respond to that?" Cheney replied: "No". And before Wolfe could rephrase or follow up, Cheney interupted him with his response which I firmly believe was out of line. ]] *

On the whole issue of fair play I agree with your so called "naive" view but it seems more to my point, which I won't jab at again. [but the quote was from "Focus on the Family"]

The whole "Situation Room" is suspect in my book for having any of the Cheney's on. It must be for ratings or to serve the purpose of media whipping boy.

http://thinkprogress.org/2006/10/30/lynne-cheneys-slapdown/

The old saying "if you can't stand the heat" sure takes on new meaning these days. http://www.bartleby.com/59/3/ifyoucantsta.html
When it comes to an interview we should all be served.

By the way, from the transcript p.6 (third from last paragraph): "Well, Wolf. If the history books were written by people who are so eager to write off this effort or declare it a failure, including many of our friends in the media, the situation obviously would have been over a long time ago." This is some piece of rhetoric which if it says anything seems to endorse my theory on the "Situation Room" if not that others could and should be in "the kitchen".

Roger

P.S. Did I start this? Sorry. Really, remind me.

* The bracketed section was inserted last as I seemed to be less than straghtforward in that area. Then I decided to read the whole transcipt but could not. It was out of line 2 1/2 pages into the 9 1/2 page PDF. It is a shame that this distracted from what was more of the same.

[ A full read of the transcipt seems to support this surmise, and today even the senior Bush has joined the chorus about the media being "out of line"(in other words)]

MAD: formerly know as...

MUTUALLY ASSURED DESTRUCTION

now as MAINLY ACCEPTED DECEPTION:
[this material was sent out 1-19-07: link at bottom found today]

There are too many potential links to alert you to, but the above should hit the mark. The point is do we intend to move forward or are we going back? Nuclear Proliferation seems the height of counter productivity in the so called new world since 9-11. It is not just MAD but INSANE and that stands for nothing, but where we are headed. That may be the real point of their madness. Hit and Run, somebody wins but what?
But I high-lite more of my own links and my own model, which is not just the fanciful reconstruction of ancient thinkers but what has always been the project for debate and what power too naturally denies.

http://political_progress_for_people.blogspot.com/2007/01/just-thought_17.html

"Just a thought" can be punctuated several ways, but "Just" is more, than just assuming that things are "old" or "new". Just is the purpose of our constitution, the only thing the president is sworn to defend. "Just" is the project our founding fathers settled on in it's words and even the preamble gets lost in the difference between needs and wants.

http://political_progress_for_people.blogspot.com/2007/01/running-list-and-reference-links.html

http://political_progress_for_people.blogspot.com/2007/01/hit-and-run-gang.html

These links bookend the long and short of it, and hopefully will be of help, but the point I will end on is how can we expect that a "War on Terrorism" will be at all successful if offense is not just the last resort, but their only plan to end it, while avoiding the law is their first and last concern?

Andi Parhamovich

AIR AMERICA LOSS
About the hard work.

More than that. Thanks anyway.

The Hit and Run Gang

and the book ends of history or
THE CON-TEXT : (The Pinnacle? 1-11-07)
[from which I resubmit the following segment on my tetrahedron of being, to give context to the book ends and book marks, and why history will be not only rewritten but replayed.]
THIS MATERIAL WAS NOT ORIGINALLY SO CONTEXTED: [Comments and links added.]

* * * * * * * * *
[Now another spin-off.][From http://www.commondreams.org/views07/0105-26.htm ]

A Platonic(Model) Narrative? Or Being the Narrative?

Politics, Physics, Philosophy and Psychology may be the four points but politics may be the pinnacle. The pinnacle could be considered by some to be a W as well, and certainly by the current president. But the reality is that We are all susceptible the behavior, thinking and feeling that We each are the pinnacle and the Power. But W can also stand for the Wonders, the Words and the Works, not to mention the We that is too often denied. For many W is only about the Win, but it can’t be without the We, or it is just about the One. It may just prove the legitimacy of this model, that one cannot be without the rest.

Then I read:
http://www.commondreams.org/views06/1222-24.htm

* * * * * * * * *

There are several F words that can also be applied, freedom is the force that must have a form that must not be feared. A W which may get too much neglect is the want, while others emphasize it. It is all about what "I" want, while there are more "I"s neglected. The power of our ideas, our intentions, and our ideals.

Running List and reference links

[Update: 8-13-07 only the link has been added]

[IMPORTANT UPDATE 3-29-07]
FOR PRESIDENTIAL PROFILES
GO HERE

[I will here update(3-17-07) the running list, without explanation but with a more inclusive link: Think Progress Trends
Kucinich
Edwards, Richardson, Obama
Clark
Dodd
Biden
Clinton ]


Democrats in '08, my original list

New York Times List

The Frame? "Hit and Run"...with a bang and the buck!

The Philosophy !

Just - A Thought. The links there are about the Attorney Generals unified philosophy, replacements at Justice, Absolute Power, physic of Iraq history, and the geometric irony of military approaches alone.

Just: a thought. Justice is the point of the constitution*, and life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness is our project, not putting wants over needs.

* links will be amended here without dates, except for this post any editing of my other posts will be noted in comments. The first four posts above will remain intact, and the index will flow from there: note that there are Just - A Thought & Just: a thought are intentionally puctuated differently-- just a hint.

Just - A Thought

Just a rap on "activist philosphy"
Just the starting point.
A just goal?
Just the gravity?
Not just the Triangle or vicious cycle.

Just: a thought.

"Fair and Balanced" does not mean having an opinion and getting a reaction, and possibly having an answer. There is the second opinion and possibly a third, that is just the start of getting somewhere which is a fourth perspective. That place is where we are going, and where we are coming from encompasses how to get there. These are the minimum vectors which are not just quadrants, for any geometry of meaning also entails a geometry of purpose, which again must be approached from at least these points. The purpose for some may be the action, for others simply the reaction.

The possible purpose at this point is that having a plan that is bad, but does not require forming another to stop it. It also points to the problem of the first plan, being simply an action or a reaction, but more honestly a pre-action that had it‘s own points that need checking. The charge that there is no plan to replace the bad plan, does not mean that the latter must move forward or will ever move us forward. That is the loop that simple action, reaction or even pre-action will not solve, without work on more points and plans and even the end point.

Just in case anyone wonders, a good starting point, has been the constitution. The three branches form an equilateral triangle, the point being the law. The press being the light needed to see their actions and all points between. Some would say, "the truth will set us free", others just "shut out the light". The purpose is freedom and the powers need balancing or the point will be what we get.

Martin Luther King, Jr.

Peace: Martin Luther King Jr.’s work.
Or the vicious cycle. Cultural Tangents:
Naturally roots and branches, not points, planes and circles.
Geometry of Purpose.

[Note: 12-28-07 On this day I have created the label WholeE Day I have removed the inoperative work link.(see loopy comments not touched]]

My Responsibility.

This is a segue* into my noting that it has not been the practice here to faithfully note any holidays, despite the occasional remembrances I have been reminded of or wished to make comment on and remember. Today is the day to remember Martin Luther King, Jr. One reason may be that some people become icons, and some events bring pain, but neither should be reason to not wish that his words be more remembered. Another reason may be that some words are hard to put any better, but all must be taken in their context.

* referring to my apology for not noting it earlier

Hope? Under Cover of Denial.

"they could try to stop me"
To Congress "Bring Em On!"
This is another one of my preemptive reads, [First Read] ...(not even clicked on) where I am giving my take based on a glance at the headlines and little more than what Air America Radio or the local paper provide. Which is probably a bit more than Bush reads, but he does say that they(the media) are a filter and I am sure he filters much of what he gets from his "objective staff". The second hope (the first being "they" do) is that there will be more diplomatic results:
Rice to attend Israeli, Palestinian summit
Secretary of state hears demand for stronger U.S. push on Mideast peace

But as I must go back, as I promised, to add links connecting previous takes, I will go straight to the point. Is the president attempting to implement all the suggestions of the IRSG under cover of denial for political gain? Or is he attempting to implement an Iran strategy under cover of politics for the security of the country? Denial of politics is not what I am talking about here in that politics must play a part, but the part that must be focused on is the goal and that and it's parts are still cloudy.

Diplomacy under the cloud of offensive measures, even under cover of defensive needs, is no excuse for not uncovering what our goal really is. Actions speak louder than words, but words must begin to be trusted, then verified by both sides, whether between nations or branches of government. The "unified executive" here and the "unity government" of Iraq, must be scrutinized, especially under the light of the cloud they like to place over the United Nations and international "law".

War Powers

Since there is debate as to whether the power of the purse is needed to force the president to the will of the people. There seems to be a more preemptive step. Since the Authorization was based on flawed intentions, and the president still confuses the war on terror with the reasons he went in to Iraq, the latter must be clarified by congress clarifying their constitutional power to declare war. They should also use extreme caution of the purse on intelligence, since the president's war strategy is preemptive, his power of intelligence is preemptive. Congress must use the power of their intelligence and the purse of intelligence to preempt what is the reason that others can only preempt by fighting, since diplomacy is only seen as a tool to rally others to our interests. That also must be in the equation as to whether our interests are any different than others. Congress must retrieve their power of war and the power of the purse, and cannot without the power of intelligence to work toward clarifying what our interests are and if the president has intentions to protect them or continue to just react to others who can only assume.

[added 11:52 PM] Thanks to Just Foreign Policy for filtering this Brzezinski piece Five Flaws in the President's Plan from the Washington Post and these two action items:
Ask Pelosi & Reid to block the escalation in Iraq Link for contacts.

Call the Senate: No to the Escalation Senator's Kennedy's legislation would block the President's plan to send more troops.
Congressional Switchboard: 202-225-3121.

The Pinnacle?

[The following is just a few short pieces that spin off from some other material.]
[From an email:]
From January 4th, 2007
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

[OR BACK FROM THE PRECIPICE:] (posted and re-titled 1-11-07)


BY THE WAY: (Not Buy the Way)

Politics, Physicalities, Philosophies and Psychologies seem to fit my tetrahedron of how things work, but being unbalanced or in denial of their part in the whole may be why we are where we are and keep getting where we've been. This is my just honed perspective of a model and I must remember that that is all it is, but that it needs work. (The following reflect parts of the puzzle, and spin off from my post today.)

Hiding Behind the Straw Argument

Resolved?

[Now another spin-off from: For America's Sake.]

A Platonic(Model) Narrative
Or Being the Narrative?
Politics, Physics, Philosophy and Psychology may be the four points but politics may be the pinnacle. The pinnacle could be considered by some to be a W as well, and certainly by the current president. But the reality is that We are all susceptible to behavior, thinking and feelings that We each are the pinnacle and the Power. But W can also stand for the Wonders, the Words and the Works, not to mention the We that is too often denied. For many W is only about the Win, but it can’t be without the We, or it is just about the One. It may just prove the legitimacy of this model, that one cannot be without the rest.

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.

Straw Elephant

Misery Loves Company
Or Day Late and a Dollar Short?

So much has been made of the pre-emptive leak that there will be a troop "surge" that it almost overshadows the rest of his potential plan. But the possibility that there are a "few good" ideas are overshadowed by the increase in "a few good men" and women. My pre-emptive take on the former is dampened by the pre-emptive reaction to the latter. My pre-emptive cynicism has taken the biggest hit, but here is my take nevertheless.

Whatever the reasoning behind the "escalation" there is always hope that it will work. However, there is more likelihood that it is just a form of "cut and run". It is more than the concept that we must "support our troops" which does not entail agreeing with the president, but that there is emotional strength in numbers in that they support each other. But it must be remembered that the president is the commander-in-chief in that he is responsible for the plan. The possibility that he will not be allowed to carry out his plan, lays the responsibility on congress where it also belongs, in their job of holding him accountable. That is the job that the voters have chosen the Democratic Congress to do, based on the president’s record and the rubber stamp his party has given him.

With all the hope for success and support for the troops always there, it is difficult to say that this is probably the ultimate cut-and-run. For if the president does not seem like he has a plan, there can be nothing for Republicans to cut-and-run from to cover their past, not to mention move forward on. The Democrats have the job to correct the past, and make sure it is not repeated, but Republicans will gladly settle for passing the buck, with an appearance that they are not as united as they were. This takes an old saying into a new camp, from "divide and conquer" to divide to run. There is something to be said here in that Democrats are divided to unite.

Where "fair and balanced" means putting up a straw dog, against a straw issue, there is a lot of "hard work" sorting the many positions and potential solutions to any problem. Is there irony or extreme congruity in the image of former Democrat Ronald Reagan and a 20-mule team not to mention the Borax needed to come clean?

Resolved?

"Sacrifice" A tribute to reality: my way of subtitling a segue to a fine piece of emotion, and sense of reality by Keith Olbermann. And now for a tangent into my reflection on reality.

Reality?

There is no reality.
Reality is what you make it. (Long Story Short: pop down to *)
Scratch that.
Reality is what we make it.
Scratch that.
Reality is what the "is" is.
Now that triggers a reaction.
Scratch that.

But beyond these perspectives
consider our actions.
The third time may be the charm.
The charm is not to ignore the you and I,
or the us and the them,
but the interaction, that we can cause.
and to consider where we can take reality,
if we can face reality
at all.

* Bush is the prime example, and a leader in this regard. The reality is that we can each feel we can make it alone, and disregard or force a perspective.

Justice may be the best example of why we must continue to look back as we move forward, as well as be held accountable for each, and may be why there is so much "hard work".

Maybe it is time to start from scratch
or at least put the "hard work" into a
model for progress.

Is there any irony in that that is too taxing?

Hiding Behind the Straw Argument.

The Republicans these days have rarely met a straw argument they could not hide behind and not incidentally which they have not created.

Actually these patriotic tough guys haven't the guts to face real issues head-on without hiding behind the way things don't work. This is an approach that should have been seen through since before the start of the war, but here is a point blank charge that must be on the books and runs through my blog.
Iraq War Lie Detector Test thanks to Dean Baker, truthout/columnist

TheLiaisonReport concept is that WE and our Representatives should see the real issues and what can really be done and not fall for pre-emptive and quite plausible incompetence.

[Links will be added to track back the points I have touched on earlier.*]

Post-post:
Before I worded the above post I has stumbled on a link on Nancy Pelosi's 100 Hours and afterwords(i.s)* I found The New Extremists, both for review later. These reflect two more aspects of this blog, looking back and looking forward, and reading memos before or after understanding their headlines. The administration walks this tight-rope for political gain, while disrespecting politics itself. There is nothing wrong with politics or partisanship, there is a lot wrong with denying them and claiming that there is simply a third option that we get to or from somehow by magic.

*
[However the latter section above was posted within the half-hour of the original and "i.s." means intentional spelling, another aspect of my work that is not always intentionally reflected in that my miscreation of words are not just a third perspective but a potential if not natural blend of what was also noted in earlier self-references to my work as Running With Rhetoric, along with an image of Bush running with scissors from the world post-9-11.]

One more on 100 hours: from TomPaine.com

"Truthiness" of Ranked Words.

Banned Words are listed by a Michigan university, and those words in the headline itself are tongue-in-cheek as in not really the truthiness. But "truthiness" did rank(def. 9) in their rank(def. 19 or 24 slang) of words. It was however honored as "the word that best summed up 2006 in an online survey by dictionary publisher Merriam-Webster."

Congratulations to my name sake, Stephen Colbert of The Colbert Report, or rather his choice of name as the inspiration for my choice of The Liaison Report.

Speaking of words (and I suppose purists would say writing of words), as the year closed I thought of the origins or my rank of a few words.

"Bush Basher" and "Context".

And since 2006 was about change of course, I will MoveOn for the moment and pick up this track in the next post.

A belated HAPPY NEW YEAR, but I feel we turned a few pages before the last closed.