Tact and Tack

Keep the Change! This is a pin the tail on the rhetoric(of sorts). As Palin said we "can keep the change". Economically, that means they will have to pay something. Tact is another matter. (It is not we or you or they or us.) In this regard some follow-up is warranted. We can agree that America is an exceptional place, but it is still a concern about what exceptionalism means. In this I mean to point to the French connection between a Slate comment(one Geir Smith) and a historical reference. Further tact(& tack) is required...
[But to be blunt the word is Heritage that explains our nation, and we are free to acknowledge our roots in the words we choose, and it can always be taken wrong by some,] i.e. we say anyone is a "fill in blank"-American but it does not mean anyone has two birth places (requiring hyphe-nation is no better than dropping one in a melting pot.)

The American Dream

The Middle-Class?

In the begining

was the word
The word* was Exceptionalism.
So it goes.[**]
But that depends on what your definition of "it" is. I am just saying, it all depends on what your definition of "exceptionalism" is.
We are the greatest! But it depends on what your definition of "greatest" is. And so it stops for some or goes round and round.

Reality aside...a definitive follow up.
Speaking of mixing it up. "Why can't the president acknowledge the value of an unexpressed thought? Thank You Tucker Carlson on FOX!
P.S. Vikings over Vick!

[*] Tumulty
[**] see the irony of origins in the French connection.
[Re: Niching a will to labels or change?]

Niche for our Nietzsche

It is not about US?
Hint: niche = field
Nietzsche i.e. proper name for our place?

[Update or bold us, with
Wake up and Eat Some Breakfast** posted from draft 12-29-10 and No Label added.*]
*not(just to be clear, I've add one label below and two links re: No Labels, but not re: Aye of Newt. Well maybe another label.)
[** breaking polling]
[twitter liberals? and here and Re:tales?]
[and Lagging Hope?]

Wake Up and Eat Some Breakfast.

[Pulled from draft "as is" 12-29-10]
Rachel Maddow...and idioms or "tangents" and "connecting the dots".
Filibuster change "fix the senate" on Jan. 5th?
Haley Barbour Citizens Council? Segregation alive?
Revisionist History Melissa Harris-Perry*

*Huckabee Paul? Which Paul? There is something odd about some of the polling. Democrats of course would love to have the likes of Sarah Palin* [** See ** here] or worse as an opponent for the sake of their candidate, Obama or not. But what would be good for the country? Should one party really be concerned with picking the other's candidate? I am just saying that a Huckabee Paul team may be less bad, and have a more reasonable debate than what Rebulicans might end up with based on the calculus of divide and dilute.[lemon in dilute link is a reference to the movement of liquids(independents/moderates) from one party to the other: a moderate Rebublican would have an uphill battle against a real centrist in that Obama's support is coming from the middle while his policies are supported by more than the left.]

*not that she won't evolve or indeed run from herself (i.e. be a force) Not that this theory applies only to running but maybe to the media there is a three bears comparison of MSNBC, CNN, FOX. My tangent is the persective that for every force there is an equal and opposite reaction, and sometimes it applies to getting information out and the reaction is the point. [A prime example is Palin/Michelle Huckabee and the right to desserts. But Palin is a force that Republicans have a problem running from. But it is earned media or is it. It is kind of funny how the subject of entitlements or rights(freedoms) is confused here. ] [cnn SMART IS THE NEW RICH hunger is the sauce Hal Sparks on CNN]Home Sweet Home?

[See Asterisks here **]

Woof Woof?

[Posted 12**-23-10 see segue: "Brackets aside..."]
Lame Duck?
[ Who let the dogs out ?]
92|Y
Yes He Did?
New Start?
Really?
Wiki Leaks
Landscaping?
Or Gloom?
Meow? Or Roar?

[The Dream Act]
Brackets aside this was saved in draft as dated, but now releases as a post and updated 10/23/10 7-8AM hour. Yes, the Dream Act is still a dream, but the Obama act, may be the Nightmare Act for Republicans.
The above word play from Meow to Woof was sometimes even beyond my drift, if you know what I mean. My metaphor is often between a rock and a hard place.
Now[*] for the main act. Woof woof and a rash of scratch marks, and its only halftime.
[*]Footnote or sideline coaching aside, I note the chart Rachel displays at about 12:01, but I could not find it online.

[Salutations & Segue]
Belated Preemptive Evolution
AND
Happy Halftime and Good Cheer!

[labels need updating: no really...below!]

[** Correction 12 not 10-23-10]

Solutions or

Six of one, or three fifths of an other?
The ruling is 3 to 2 and I am glad I did not preemptively jump on Al Franken's RSN. There has been an issue made by the right or libertarian about freedom's forces, but my point is that the FCC is about a broad spectrum(pun on airwaves) but what it isn't the Commerce Department may be. In this regard the acuteness,(pun on funny thing happened on way to the angle) has to do with what is not on cable may take cellular form, but it is all business. i.e. traditionally if not erroneously, the FCC is about the so-called "public airwaves" what was radio and television are on to other formats or providers. If they can do with out transmitting or satelites, it is one thing, but if they need right of ways for ground links another, then there is the commerce itself, and if they could just not need to cross state lines... If nothing else is clear it should be the complexity that arises from not just our constitution but readings, not that this or the articles necessarily are... but works in progress.
[Speaking of progress or update(not)or [un-Swift segue] here is a concern: Are Social Security payments really dependent on the debt limit being raised? My point is that it is an interesting wrinkle in the charge that Social Security is not part of the so-called debt crisis, but it may be very important in the form you lie of the new congress and the table, no matter who has set it. i.e. is it too late to de-bait(or rebate) the lock box or reinvent the mouse trap?]

Obtuseness?

Robert Reich asks why are Democrats voting for Reaganomics?
Paul Craig Roberts suggests another spin on Reaganomics.
Is it the obtuseness of stagflation/inflation?
Is that like growing the pie, while each piece gets smaller?
No, it is like the pie not growing while costs do, and jobs go to pieces. Whew, I think I cut that close to home. But I do think that several of their points do intersect (actually lines do, but at points) but there could be another angle or perspective needed in the back and forth. Enough ge oh me trick ally pointed puns. It may take a third econonomic perspective or formulae to alter the give and take. At least it is not just about supply and demand, but employment and progress. But for whom?
[I did not mean to kill two birds with one stone, but yes I am often obtuse or have a cute angle on things. I may often have too big a picture(stone) or skip from one to another perspective(bird). But this toss is back to the concept of not all things being equal. Not just taxes, but debt and spending, in regards to alternate pies, perspectives or form you lie.]
[Potential Star Chamber? The other four points.]
[Breaking, a cuteness.]

(cont.) All Tax Cuts

are not created equal and "going to the mat" is a term of contention, not a veto or even a scoring term in contention.

Obama posts a win.

Note the pun in retrospect .
Obama cares and is Building on Change, bold added there.
There has been some concern in regards to Social Security as to a slippery slope being created as to the beginning of the end, but I feel that it could be just the start of the proper slope, an up hill discussion. As for the issue for some of leadership, it must include the reality of parties, classes, and labels, and the inability to dictate their use, nor eliminate their potential for change. I am not implying that the President has a clear goal in any particular concern, but getting things done and getting things on the table, and getting people concerned, is big. Not that the media does not have a big part in making it less clear.

[Fact Check Please: "I know that we are going to borrow every nickel in this bill," Hoyer lamented.] [I do not believe this is economically valid if one can read the charts, all tax breaks are not created equal.]

Building On Change

Obama cares about change, it was not necessarily his plan or our plan, but what congress thought we could get. But it is only a building block of change. This is a preemptive comment of sorts based on the facts in the leed, although now I am mid-read. Facts in other states are different, but the main point is the economic sense that "adverse selection*" costs someone. Here I have read it fully, though not necessarily able to relate it fully, the changes may also take adverse tracks. i.e. No mandate? Other more direct "interference ".
(italics not fully read)
* not buying insurance until you need to, and insurances required to sell it.
[Breaking Under the Radar or Flying over the Top? Basically preemptively , Republicans blame the government for the rising housing prices and the crash on not continuing support from government.]
[12-17-10 Obama cares(above bold added for original intent a pun)

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.]

Clause Wits

...war is politics by other means
I'm sorry... someone*** has made a point of my tangents. But it might be Germane*, or was he Austrian. No.. Prussian and Hegelian.
Could it not be said that economics has been the same, politics by other means?
What about religion?** Is that a valid spin?

*intended spelling
** in an evolutionary sense

[See update paradox of congress regarding line item veto]

*** also bowing to someone I include a definition from spin link:

Clausewitz’s trinity comprises three specific elements. The identity of those elements is readily evident to anyone who actually reads the first paragraph of his description: It is "composed of primordial violence, hatred, and enmity, which are to be regarded as a blind natural force; of the play of chance and probability within which the creative spirit is free to roam; and of its element of subordination, as an instrument of policy, which makes it subject to reason...." (emphasis added). This set of elements is usually labeled "emotion/chance/reason"; sometimes "violence/chance & probability/rational calculation"; or, even more abstractly, "irrationality/nonrationality/rationality."

It would seem that this creates our reality as opposed to an original intent begetting results, let alone values. Oh, but I guess it does. But some just have a different ge oh me try.
[12-15-10 Speaking of timing or tangents(footnote)the original purpose of my blog was to record such leaps, not always capable of recording their inspiration.]
[In the above footnote I succeeded in not loosing that inspiration, though it was close, but we have lost a very important piece in our power portfolio in Richard Holbrooke, may he rest in peace.]

Risky Business

Risking progress?
Update: "the filibuster"
The other guy?
If Democrats can manage any improvements on this plan, go for it. But not at the risk of doing nothing. Even breaking it up for the sake of getting what should not be bargaining chips*, for the sake of "the debt" or sticking to principles or campaign promises, may have adverse impacts to the econonomy, and with it being even more of an up hill, problematic legislature, getting more done may not be on the table. Some have argued for a line item veto...for the president. Not to revive that arguement, but imagine[**] the impact on the political calculus if congress had a line item veto after all the work of crafting legislation, be it this plan or another.

*trading doing the right thing for allowing the wrong thing
[post-post-google tangent hmmm?]
[** post post realization that this sentence is a paradox of sorts; Congress is bi-cameral and does have line item vetos, it just has to go back to the other house and branch. I guess my point rests on one body having a line item veto or final say on another branch's work.]

Not Chuffed

and hopefully not cuffed? Have I crossed the line?
[Not in dissing Obama, I support his general success, and posit counter-intelligence, not necessarily facts, but context from so-called facts. In the case of the Espionage Act, is it a strategy to use it, so that it will be on the table for consideration of: a. repeal, b. Supreme Court action c. Political calculus -- a forum to buck 'em -- if we will?]

4M 2 $M

4 um to buck 'em
or
4 'em to money media?
I "heart" BS? Bernie Sanders?*
Not exactly a filibuster.
But moving the goal posts?
[I am truly split between being encouraged by the President, the Democratic Caucus and actually getting the right thing done. I hope it is more than just a lesson plan for sacrifice. Basically Bernie Sanders is sorting out what is wrong and what can be improved in the so-called compromise, which I hope is not the lamb.]
*thanks to Thom Hartmann** [Update: 12-13-10 Risky Business]
[less benefits to rich, more investment in country infrastucture and safety net]

** see update link to Sanders filibuster under Risky, to Clinton under Business

Obamanomics

[12-10-10 Update: No Wait. Yes weight. A play on matter over words, & a belated thumbs up. If the Democrats can get more done, go for it. But what have they been waiting for?]

The Plan: not exactly (the former is not fully read, but a link that may be more durable: funny business or hacking aside)
But back to funny business or the nature of our dilemma.
Obama+no+mics was not my original intent. No weight, it was! Obama is getting the message through, and giving Democrats the 4M in the $M to have everything on the table and a good fight over it. The people may see the difference, while Democrats do their best to Get'er done. The deficit commission is another wait-e matter. An Oak Table if you will to put ideas on the table without party characterizations.
[update part II, 12-10-10: 4M = 4'em & forum $M=buck media, money media for um?]

Obama Leaks

Some might say he reeks,
but I say that there is more to the issue than liquids or gases.
Pump out the rhyme. This is just a leed into two points which I cannot tell where they came from.
1. the debt does not matter
2. social security does not matter to the debt
3. GE I did not know I was going to stick with the meta4, but of course both matter. And the underlying points I want to make, which I cannot source particularly is that the President's plan when accepted will establish one and two. In other words, the kind of debt matters(tax cuts v. investments) and an opening of the "lock box" that makes congress accountable for social security regardless of debt. Neither are easy to say, leak of the leeds** or reek of the leads, but taxes do matter to everyone, but so do budget calculations and the big picture whether you are a person, corporation, state or fed/global.

[And please note that I have not really made much of the Wikileaks controversy, as I do not support the methods and reasons for its existence. While we do need to have better journalism and government, I am not sure it will help in the scheme of things. Rupert Murdock as a source of inspiration, now supports my feelings in this area, as well as the reference or links of reasoning to scientific journalism.* While my crack at GE hints at the $marminess of some journalism, I will cover that with this mud. The mud in this case is the subjective skills that are responsibly noted which makes raw leaks only facts not truth. Raw data(information) is not just objective but subjective itself.]

*12-9-10(comma added)Rupert Murdock does not support my feelings, him as an inspiration supports my feelings to the contrary, as well as an erroneous scientific take. And last link brackets (information is not just in the form of numbers, but even they are subject to context and formulas).

** [1-17-12 C-(sic): ledes is the intended spelling in this typo]

Silent Majority

Now that takes us back.
Speaking of the future.
(4 more)
Now this is what I am talking about.
Not to mention, No More Fall...Well.
[Breaking balance also NFRY, Bold "that" indicates full read above, and reminder that I spun this off (and update/see "Well") before I saw the points Kornacki made regarding the presidential history.]

Tails Aside

I mean Tales...or mythification.
My wife and I were taking a walk before the Apple Cup (The Husky-Cougar match-up)and ran across a house divided, speaking of tents, big or united. The game was not really on my mind that morning when I whipped up the tale of Cats and Dogs, but as we walked by this house, the wind must have blown, and their flag seemed to speak for the future. Huskies won 35-28 with 44 seconds left. It was a bad week for cats which will hopefully lead to a good week or more for 44.
[12-8-10 And Remember the Wave and the base is of. And Obama is no Cheer Leader, nor Third Way, but maybe of the Fifth Dimension.] The Ribble(Pun) here is that my thought ran to the cheerleaders Reagan and Bush, but it is interesting to note two more, FDR and Eisenhower.

The Real Deal

Someone said that about Obama at one time. But more recently I think this is the deal, Fine Man aside. I was actually going to leed this with a bit of anachronism* and I hadn't even found that link yet. But here are two reflections of reality that preceded the Re:Lead and the Fineman.
* and yet to read,
but De:characterization of McFly
or a new approach to the future?
[The above anachronistically is posted 7:47 AM Monday December 6th. Links not fully read yet, but The Real Deal refers to the stand president Obama is taking, putting his foot down. Maybe both feet down. As leader of the Democrats, he will be a compromisor in chief and executive for the people, extending unemployment, and getting the tax cut for the income under $250 K, as well as the Start Treaty, or failing that will have done all he could (and Democrats as well) in the face of Republican resistance to helping the people and fighting for peace. The point is that independents want him to stand up for them, he will, and we will find out who aren't and who aren't for compromise. Standing for something like holding a vote will be appreciated win or lose, and we will know where each party stands. That is the meaning of Cat 'o Nine Tales v. Who let the dogs out? Yellow, Green or Blue Dogs, and whipping cats together with their tails aside.]

Re: Leads

Cat 'o 9 Tales V. Who let the dogs out!
This is a perfect follow up to the Mis Leeds.[*] Stop.
[I will begin at the end, which is very hard for a work in progress...or should I start at the top? Not? Leadership or Bottom Lines for the People? As for timing, Mis Leeds preceded Re: Leads. I will skip a story[*] in getting to the Leadership issue, many[*] actually[*], but I have covered now the Re: Leads and will now MoveOn to the Top Line(secondary leed) which was noted* on a page of a resolution as it was debated in its proper 4M. Speaking of Cap Locks, I wasn't, but my fingers do the talking and so does $M(**) sometimes. This could be a flip of the free press, or the Buck in media? Remembering this is a work in progress, and also anachronistic, or is nothing contemporary? Just what was the Resolution? To give Obama courage! There were touching speeches. So(now) I get to the top from the bottom. Go Tatupu!!!!!! Now that is current. Waterbirds(brackets/italics) aside...(The Seahawks just took the lead.) And by Jiminy they are playing the Panthers. Who knew? But back to the issue of cats. They are hard to hurd.. Democrats are a big tent, but there are at least two kinds of dawgs.[yellow and blue(**)] We may need to whip up our courage and yet the(whoo trip)the big picture(touchdown) takes a brush of the artists pallet[e]. Woof, woof!]
* literally sitting in the reorg meeting, before the resolution was passed and a suspension of the rules failed to amend it, I noted a rough form of these words, actually exactly but for the o'.[close enough for journalist work?]
{typo edit ed: who knows jack}
[** capitalization effect 4M= 4'em but $M= buck media and not 4us.]
Postgame W(R)ap: Tale of Two Haves?(PI) From down 0-14 to finishing 31-14 the Nader has been passed ***.
*** A Resolution Calling for Courage and Leadership now from President Obama and Democratic leadership in the House and Senate.
[updates 12-9-10]
[*] link added and other editing [1-17-12 embedded in his 12-9-10 update C-(sic) "ledes" is correct spelling sometimes punned as Mis-leads.]
[(**)] in editing I have added a few hints and corrected some grammar/punctuation, but I will note that I was blogging with the Seahawks game on, and should note speaking of color, the passing of Don Meredith, quarter back & color commentator. As a personal aside it feels kind of funny to have been in a class with Tatupu's dad.
{note 3rd [*] Tails Aside already updated note Presidential Cheer Leaders and the pun on Tails and Tales.}

Mis Ledes

Or relatively grammatically correct?

Bloomberg is definitely on the Whine List or is it running for the Tea Party or just sweeping things under the Astroturf?

[Catapulting the Propaganda? A refudiation. With a sense of irony and con text, I mean validation.]

Update

See Column Right. [Under Construction]
[Or might be Under Jenga!]
[DETOUR]
See Labels/link.

[Anyone who makes absolutes is usually wrong or recreationist. Testing 1,2,3 ?]
[Saved... or not posted FB]
Rocker Fella:

Real Clear Politics: The only thing clear may be the Channel (Pun on Clear Channel)* and that it is clearly politics, more than news. Or maybe it is just “fair and balanced” but it is not a public service.** Senator Rockefeller did not say that the FCC should take either network off the air waves.*** He was directly quoting a little bug in him by Jiminy, and Real Clear Politics did not even get it right. To which there was a reply: What happened to Freedom of Speech...."The answer to speech you don't like is more speech--not censorship." Apparently the market may censor but not bugs. Actually the Senator is working on an Rx for the flu the market spreads. While to some the above may be an innocent cough, in reality Freedom of Speech needs access to the markets or it is just another censorship.
http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/296636-1 Not that reading the first amendment will clear it up.

* http://www.clearchannel.com/Radio/PressRelease.aspx?PressReleaseID=2837 some airwaves
** the internet does not have public service requirements but does now use airwaves
*** airwaves aren’t required but are utilized
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE5BH2FX20091218

New Bull

Or "good things to light ".
No I am not suggesting that we light a Washington Post, but GE...Boehner did not call anything "chicken crap".

Extend Tax Cuts for All

under $250K or $1 Mill!
Stop mischaracterizing it as not for the wealthy too.

Alternative Debt Commission, and Alternative Tea Party Plan!

[Not* necessarily plans of this blogger]
*Thom Hartmann recently discussed: Is Obama the last Republican President?

[And who is fired up**? Not Obama. But "who let the dogs out?" Pun on yellow or blue dogs, but also partisan dogfights.]

[** Republicans throw down gauntlet of no until "we have funded the government" and "protected every taxpayer from a tax hike". Stop the spin cycle and let the dogs out. i.e. Democrats should get everything they can using all measures at their disposal. Meanwhile or rather yesterday, an Earnest caller to the Ed Schultz Show put it clearly,(if I may paraphrase) it is in the hands the Democrats in congress.***]

***Ribble on Legislate!

Lives

(or jobs) in the balance.
[Amy Goodman found earlier]

Meanwhile on the jobs front(or tax cuts/stimulus) Republicans claim no data[**] on millionaire target. Close enough for government* work.
(hardball breaking: fight or switch)
*context for chart
[further breaking: and pesky fact (not included) Bush appointee]
[Matt Laur?]
** on the other hand

THANKS...

Taking!

Who is the Heir...

to Robert K. Merton?

I don't know...
but one never knows.
Have a good Turkey weekend!
[11-25-10 The stuffing of Finance and Mandelbrot? HAPPY THANKS GIVING!]

De Tour

Three Pillars? Really?
People, Planet, Profits... what is it holding up? A missing dimension?
[Under Construction: Subtitled(above saved in draft)]
The Mess Age: I think I told you so.
Still in draft-update to preface (raw notes here)
Oops, Paradigm Still in Draft [Stop.]

Raw Notes

[above posted 11-22-10 The following are the Raw Notes on Codevilla.]

[p3 re class(parapraph) or summer break(diversity) who needs Republicans when Democrats have class and diversity?]
[p4 :change]
[p5 blatant error non-gov Kissinger Fed IMF]
[p6 wait two classes?]

[Divide to whine - ? - before the political divide I think, is a thought "divided against itself" {statistiacal? r*}]
[greater of two evils]
[Royal palinisms]
[The Uniter]

[Us and them]
[Schlock]
[Wealth Associations? Enclaves?]
[Market - Educations? Shiboleths? ... Adam Smith "specialization"? language]
[Tribe Kagan court]
[Certifiable] italics reread.]

Dependence Economics

...

The Country Class? "non-orientation to government"
p3 small v. large
p6 country class American ways
p7 Snobsian
"Congruent Angendas?"
p1 Resistannce
p2 Moral Revolutianary
Suppose...

republic chain
(constitutional monstrosity)
Anti-Climatic)

Economics...

is no more the vehicle of our values than religion or politics. But politics is the more fair and balanced of the three as long as none of the three dominate the message, four they will. The s'um is great than the duoh!

[Subtext or Con Text?]
A thought divided against itself.
[Field theory or spare the Rodney? ...speaking of Homer]
[Vector valuing dynamics]

Still in draft?

Here is the preface to something I am torn between chewing and eschewing on.

Rally in Progress?
The following is submitted As Is.

(titled)PARADIGM?
Or Ribble? Hint? Or shifts?
The origins:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the consent of the governed, -- That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

One thought...
[in con text: or (sum)some...regarding the Lord Acton quote about power corrupts the key is in the word "absolute" and regardless if it is the people, some of the people or the sum* of the people]
*an erroneous yet prophetic insert of the link (as in a word divided and short for some thing else)

Italics added:

to Eschew
Paradigm? still in draft...
a thought divided:
Theory of Peace?
Reality of Politics.
The preceding two lines are a pun on the paradigm in draft or rather on the references to uniting or dividing. It is obtuse because I have not included the Facebook comment for technical sake, but have summed it as noted. And of course reality is a concern for all of us, but politics? (Ouch, did not mean to transcend or actually hit the point of intersect.) And rather than embed a point in the bracketed hint, I will simply say may Chalmers Johnson RIP! If only it meant Rally in Progress!
BTW: The a4mentioned "still in draft" is in the 4M of raw notes, but I will by way of segue post the preface.[last link added 11-24-10]

Paradigm?

Or Ribble? Hint? Or shifts?
The origins:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

One thought...
[above posted 11-22-10 The following are the Raw Notes on Codevilla.]

[p3 re class(parapraph) or summer break(diversity) who needs Republicans when Democrats have class and diversity?]
[p4 :change]
[p5 blatant error non-gov Kissinger Fed IMF]
[p6 wait two classes?]

[Divide to whine - ? - before the political divide I think, is a thought "divided against itself" {statistiacal? r*}]
[greater of two evils]
[Royal palinisms]
[The Uniter]

[Us and them]
[Schlock]
[Wealth Associations? Enclaves?]
[Market - Educations? Shiboleths? ... Adam Smith "specialization"? language]
[Tribe Kagan court]
[Certifiable] italics reread.]

Dependence Economics

...

The Country Class? "non-orientation to government"
p3 small v. large
p6 country class American ways
p7 Snobsian
"Congruent Angendas?"
p1 Resistannce
p2 Moral Revolutianary
Suppose...

republic chain
(constitutional monstrosity)
Anti-Climatic)

Chew On...

Or Eschew [*]... on This.
One might bite.
(Speaking of class or was it paradigms?)
[Ribble in a Tea Pot?]
[BTW: I am crafting a reply to the ribble or paradigm. It bites...a thought "divided against itself"?]

[*] update 11-22-10 bold italics update bold indicates I have finally read fully but italics not a recommend [P.S. asterisk is post everthing above]

Really?

Fair and Balanced?
Or
Objectivity v. Subjectivity?

Fact v. Truth

Amazing Precedence

Not really, I occasionally agree with a Republican. Senator Richard Lugar(Republican) challenges Democrats to hold the vote on the "Trust but Verify". And I would say to all Democrats "call their bluff". But there is a bit of false equivalence*, in staying the course.[**]
[Breaking Related]
[Speaking of Breaking.]
* news and democracy

[Not[***] to mention, or include irony and fair and balanced.]

[The Wave In Balance: Act]
[Belated Ribble: actually the ribble is not late, but the importance of a new START? Without a treaty and the respect for law, it only leaves disrespect for politics, the tyranny of anarchy, and the terrorism of preemption.]
[** Ripple in the pond or splash?]
[*** it is not about replacing Obama, nor about finding a Karl Rove for the Left, it is about politicians and media doing their jobs, and both fighting for the people and changing the process.]

Starting from Scratch

Well, not exactly...the Lame Swan.*
[New Label,(Navigation II] may be redundant or too all inclusive as it is all about course change. and vector dynamics of tact and tack. Original Navigation label was a pun on getting around this site as well as an overarching purpose. But I will further aid navigation, noting the bold links here, as well as pulling out an embedded link from the last one, and hope I remember to include enough labels below.]
* lameduck

[Just in Dream Act, yes, but Nightmare Act: not using Lameduck Congress and Reconciliation to pass as much as possible*. Priority: Disclose Act and Net Neutrality and anything that effects the Citizens United irony. I would add that there be something that prevents House investigations from being a rerun of the previous congress.]
* November Surge to be updated.

Bloomberg/Scarborough

Scary!
I hope I can find a recent Michael Bloomberg interview where he whined about the expiration of the Bush tax cuts for the rich. Whine may not be an accurate description of it, but an accurate description of the expiration of the tax cuts for the rich was not in the interview either. For now I will have to whine that I can't find it. His whine did not demonstrate a basic understanding of the tax code, where each bracket of income is taxed the same for everyone. The next dollar one earns does not make the poor rich person a second class citizen.

"One Can...

Reasonably Hope".
(Henceforth, bold links will be fully read.)
[update Point Counter-Point:

The White House vehemently denies that there is any change in policy. "The president has been crystal clear that we will begin drawing down troops in July of 2011. There is absolutely no change to that policy," said Tommy Vietor, a White House spokesman.(This quote appears in both McClatchy sources

Parsing Focus or Focus Combat:
My point is that the two articles, before I read them, seemed to indicate a proper balance. Unbeknownst to me the McClatchy was even updated but I have now read the original McClatchy (Point-above) it was based on, as well as the other two (Counter-Point) and find my original embedded feeling that it was a good transition balance from military to political focus. This is a multidimensional* refocus, which even Rand Paul has played a reasonable part in. The focus is not so much on July 2011, but ultimate success**, and the aim to bring the discussion from military to political focus. Must we be reminded that while Congress does have the powers of the purse and war, the President is commander-in-chief and there is no real constitutional branch of diplomacy or foreign policy or Department of Peace.
* balance of powers within our nation and within other nations (from military to diplomacy)
** July 2011, Transition begins.
[Related Micro-Mess Aging. "the medium is the message" the Mess age is the medium?]

Point

Counter-point.(saved in draft: posted 11-15-10)
[And updated]

What Obama can't say.

Chris Matthews says Obama must do something to show he gets it. But what really needs to happen is that the people need to get it. Get it?[***]
[As the show(Hardball) progressed.]

[11-12-10 We aren't even sure the Debt Panel gets it. Often we aren't even sure what (or who) it is to get, but a recent comment by Thom Hartmann spurred me to comment as he closed his show with: "we need to start making things." While that is partially correct, is it not a bit too into the "consumption racket"*? Why not say we need to start valuing things? Would that not shine the irony on our market system? Maybe I am being too subtle. Maybe I am being too idealistic. But both these shine the light on the complexity of reality. My point ends and begins in The Republic, and (regards the irony of)** Platonic Justice.
* "air quotes" added (not that anyone calls it that)
** (comment added): maybe (dynamics of) would be better.]
[*** change: too much(Obama) or not enough?(jobs)]
[Bingo? see * here not there]
[Breaking yet to read. But I will preemptively summarize what I feel is the Obama approach, broad brush change, that started with his domestic agenda, through diplomacy and security issues, ending in global support for change. Wow, when I start a broad brush, I really swath. But in particular I mean global monetary policy, and I forgot to note the issue of trade policy, in this step up the paint ladder.]

[Note: 4-26-11 Bold and Link added to The Republic: "Yeah, That's the Ticket"]

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?]

Veterans Day

Service and Sacrifice.
[Timing is not everything. My intent was to have this automatically post at midnite. However I was uncertain it had not posted prematurely, so I saved it in draft. Speaking of prematurely, the sacrifice noted in the Youtube makes those left behind the veterans, while the departed have their day of honor on memorial day. While some have taken the route that pursuing the end of(a) war does injustice to veterans, it is more complicated or awkward to accept the contrary.]

Maslow Search

Speaking of 'nOdd needs, I have posting issues.
But in regards to Maslow blog search, I also need a Need list.
As Maslow stands.
Need as found 12-16-11
I
II
III
IV
V
VI
VII
VIII
IX
X
XI
XII
XIII
XIV
XV
XVI
XVII
XVIII
XIX
XX
XXI

Now I should note that "pop" quiz has never been graded, in terms of testing my G'Ribble, that there are changes to the search al gore rhythms. i.e. at a later date will the same search find the same sources. I know I have referenced Maslow but then maybe it was too embedded.  Here is a google find.

Back Log

[Update 11-10-10]
The Punchline
StandUp: This is a wisecrack. .
Bottom Line: Timing is everything, and sometimes accounting, but space matters.
Yet sometimes only a chart will do.
My point is that debt is not the primary problem, although maybe growth is. Debt to GDP is not really a problem either...yet, note the peak in the 1940's proceeded by the growth in the middle class(cni)* and continued growth in GDP(cni). What also occured in the subsequent years, increase in wages, increase in consumption, and increases in taxes.(cni) Correlary: taxes are not the primary or secondary problem either, they are a fraction of the solution.

*(cni)chart not included
[Speaking of timing, just as I post the above. Who knew?]
[ABOVE: Updated 11-10-10.]

The C Word
Olbermann to Return Flash Back*
Focus Parsing

Parsing Combat - Obama Plan
* editing in progress

[Just in:Let me Finish,Chris Matthews Just getting started, Ed Schultz. Ribble: Childish Patronizing, Clumsy Parsing]

The C Word.

Clever?
[Saved in draft for unknown reason, unedited*
i.e. written date above, posted 11-9-10 AM]
Toure's Turn? Do me a Favre and remember, government and politics are not football.
Except maybe for the commercialization with make me think of the Gecko and Aff Quack. But explain to me how the House, the Senate and the President, not to mention the two parties not being teams play into it.
Fair Game? Well that may be a separate rant. "Life is not fair..." that is why society evolved and gave us our founding documents. Freedom is not a force. But I'll give you something to cry about.[Mixed aphorisms or patronizing jingles.] There's no crying in baseball, is there in football?
* due to possible construction distraction and grapes of whine or patronizing refs.

Olbermann to Return

After two day exile, MSNBC will return him to the air. While not blogging on it myself,(I did not panic) between friends I noted, that good would come from it. Not so much the book as the difference between FOX and MSNBC. (Con text)
(Parsing Disgust and the Mama(middle) Bear! Not that the middle is the right, or the left or right wrong, but maybe Mother nature does have a hand in who knows best. Not to call MSNBC the baby bear, but is does seem childish to devolve into who started* it.

* not me but I should revisit for update under-construction.

Focus Parsing

Hocus-Pocus-Focus: but another good Krugman.
[Click the bold.]

Rachel Maddow Effect

Well, not really.
The Scott Brown effect should really be called the Tea Party Vaccine Effect.
[Actually to be fair and balanced(not to pun on FAUX news) but this really hinges simply on the Scott Brown/Tea Party(ish) claim that what happened in Massachusetts could happen across the country. That is really an uphill job in that state, and the connection to what happened in the rest of the country really had to do more with the targeting of money and conservative/tea party on Republican and swing districts. I have not really looked at that piece of data, but it seems to be a natural dynamic as well. Moderates are knocked off because they have to be moderate in swing districts. I don't think that Massachusetts was ignored by the influences of money and party powers but the people may have learned from the Scott Brown rhetoric. And naturally liberals and progressives are so, because their people may agree with them. So this really balances the dilemma whether the nation or even a state, needs to be more moderate or progressive[**].
[Maddow 11-3-10*]
**[The Last Word]
*date of show not update