Anachronistic...

Review:[**]
The State of the Union was Wednesday Evening[*], my preemption was Tuesday, and an update with local implications the Morning of, and my review the Morning After.

My point is that the Honeymoon is over, but Obama has not exactly called for a divorce from bi-partisanship, but is still willing to talk.[***]

[Links added 1-31-10]
[*](as time passed there are now missing links)
[**](ibid.)
[***]President's Question Time (MSNBC-Rachel and Keith)1/5

[2-3-10: asterisks noted as missing]

Presidential SOTU

Huffington On Bipartisanship *.-Text-
PBS Annotated SOTU text/video
GOP Responds to SOTU
and promoteown solutions.
Oh, it's the economy(brainy)! -Newsweek**

My summary of SOTU: Heavy on hope, light on hype.

My reply to response: It was "fair and balanced" and with less rhetoric almost a Blue Dog, and with better facts almost a someone that could work across the aisle. Talk is cheap and hype costly. Hope is very economical, but progress takes investment.

* It seems that the following is very odd(my bold):

Sen. Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.), the second most powerful Republican in the Senate, was just as blunt and brutal. "It was a campaign speech," he said. "I thought it was a very partisan speech. He did not help himself with Republicans tonight. You do not bash the opposition and then encourage them to work with you."

How, specifically, did he bash?

"Every third paragraph was complaining about the mess that George Bush got him in. He didn't mention the words George Bush but he didn't have to," said Kyl. "After more than a year, take ownership of the problems you have. You campaigned for president to solve these problems so stop complaining about the mess that you inherited. That was okay for a few weeks or a few months, but after awhile it gets a little tiresome."

Kyl went on to complain about "thinly veiled suggestions that all Republicans do is say 'no,' that we have to stop saying 'no' to everything. That's not the way to encourage productive cooperation with the other side."

Especially as it continues:

Was he offended by the shot at skeptic(sic) of the science behind climate change?

"Well, he probably meant it as such, but frankly I didn't receive it as such, since I'm one of the skeptics," he said.

Anything else?

"He started out talking about the constitutional requirement to report on the state of the union and in the very first part of the speech he did. And then he veered off of it and got into this big campaign mantra, which just isn't done. I know this is his first one, but still, it shouldn't be so much about him, and how he didn't come here to do this and he didn't come here to do that and he's going to fight on and so on. It's not about that. It's about the American people and how you're going to react to what they've been telling you -- or trying to tell you -- about what they'd like to see done."

I thought that was pretty much what President Obama did, and it seems odd if not forced that this Republican take makes any sense. Of course they believe in an invisible force (Ctrl F hand) not to mention freedom as a force, which is even less accurate.(just speaking economics and physics). It seems that MassAChooseIts independents, moderates, democrats, and apparently the Senate's #2 Republican has given the president a mandate. Now congress, "may the force** be with you".

BTW: we don't have to worry about deficits anymore**, there is no looking back and it is the President's economy.

footnote:
asterisk * is post I am commenting on
asterisk ** refers back to preemptive crack and source(Newsweek/YouTube)
But seriously.
*** see comment 3 of more there re: change agent

[UPDATE: On Thom Hartmann, Congressman Blumenauer suggests Valentines for the Senate (Valentines are the broken parts of the bills that need passing. Progressively: ping pong, reconciliation, nuclear option, Valentines [*] . Seemingly how I put it[**] & within the mechanics of the process and politics.)]
[*] 1-29-10 link to Valentines for the Senate
[**] The Nature of Things (posted 1-20-10) also "up, down, or side ways" not to mention the Mass A Choose Its Dilemma. Make it so! May the force be with you.[Is there a Mass A Choose Its Lesson?]

"or nuanced"[P.M. Update]

[Morning after moved and continued in new post]
[Subtitle: "Mass a Choose Its Dilemma" (*)]
P.M. Update: Just a note on Mike Malloy (self-described of the "Real Left"[***])had a good rant for people tonight. Actually, I wish I could be more detailed or nuanced*, but I hope it will come back to me. Now that's the story. But it just might be...come on, give Obama a shot.
*I wonder if sarcastic irony comes out even?
P.S. heard on way home from hearing two "progressive"(uncertain if really so-described[**]) Congressional candidates for the WA 8th, but they will fight for the Dem nod.]

[**]1-27-10 Hint: see which is which,the Left or Democrat.]
[***]link added 1-27-10

(*) Washington State is undergoing a simultaneous electoral evolution and court fight over the Top Two Primary. Hence(apparently)the difficulty in finding out how the ballot will look with or with out labels of D and R selected by the parties or just preferences by the candidate at their choosing. It is not a direct correlation to the other state, but how the masses choose to party.

[Speaking of Mass a Choose Its, Obama won, not Obama-one: How do you know you are Right? If you find anything wrong with this(**).]
(**) place holder for Hardball/Game Change

or nuanced

it is just
thinking
for people

It is too early to tell if Obama is getting it.
But at least look at what we are getting,
what we aren't and what we could.

We must acknowledge the 3D world, not counting change. Time takes time, and more than two perspectives. I am not sure where that goes, but I am talking just left and right. See? One needs to be off line to see that, and the answer is not even or fair and balanced, let alone in the middle.

BlogOn and play Hardball!
(See comment 1)
(there is more than one emphasis 4bold)

[P.M. Update: moved and continued]

There is only one letter...

between hope and hype;
Why.

[1-23-10 retro - fight.]
[1-24-10 Start Thinking, Right: after that, it is just; punctuation and gramma R.

[1-25-10: Air America(Chapter 7), too much competition, AM1090 still kicking, and the next kick is Free Speech for people.org!]
[1-26-10: or nuanced (for later)]

Between I Rock and a Hard Place

I don't know which is which but at least there is a fight.(or vice verse us)
There has been much silliness out there, but the message from Massachusetts seems to be about the lack of change.

Obama aside(I think he will get it and in fact has a message), people are not as incremental and pragmatic or nuanced, and independents and moderates, not to mention the Democratic base feel left behind.

Rather than blogOn, I will leave this as framed.

[On the other hand or rock or hard place...or nuanced might be the proper place to mirror*: a fair and balanced fight, and no faux crack.(TPM:Obama/Hardball:Dean/The Nation:Greider)(See labels and comment).]

*oops- see "framed" for hard place.

Continue the Ping Pong!

I don't care if you just get it over the net(Reconciliation) or spin for the corner(Nuclear Option) but the House should have an up or down vote to let the voters know where they stand. If the Senate bill does not pass, then pass the 80% that is the same as the House or pass them in sections. Then only the Senate will suffer the Massachusetts effect, et al.
(if there is one link you open make it the bold)

BTW: Happy Anniversary! 1-20-09 Honeymoon Over!
[Remember the Hype]
[Remember the A Chord]
[Remember the Change]
See comment!
Yes, my comment on Arianna and the blessing of course corrections, but one more thought that occured earlier. (Lessons learned: a Marshal Plan for Haiti.)

Progressive Break Fast

Campaign for America's Future.

The above link is a compendium of news, comments & hope for progress.
Meanwhile I have made a few comments w/minor corrections **,
but bring this up much as it is(was):

Does the Massachusetts vote mean that the House should pass the Senate Bill, or should they reject it?
My view is it should get a vote, up or down or side ways* meaning risking some changes, risking the filibuster. Then the Senate can up or down it, or break it up. Speaking of holding water or breaking a mirror.***

* just as Ed Shultz was unclear about the ping pong potential, this is as tricky a net in the parlaimentary procedures that would offer this option. (Reconciliation or Nuclear Option)[Adjusted snippets of original continued.] [Psst...(Rachell)Speaking of "mythical beasts"(...)at least Barney Frank got the mess-age(...){Ouch: Moment of Meek to Fine Man?} (and Governor Ed Rendell say and does go downe.)

BTW: It is Senator Reid, not House Speaker, Ed.(Take nothing from the order of these links than that I do not recall which has Ed confused on the Reid/Pelosi positions in the process but great coverage and dialogue.)

** see [*]& comment 2 there
*** the holding water bit is a play on the Hardball promo regarding Chris Matthews' style of argument, Waterloo, and his leaking all over the mirror Howard Dean holds up. But I really did not intend a restroom metaphor, and so it goes.

[Apologies for the anachronistic asterisks and shuffled links but Rachel Maddow's were not yet available and I wished to bring up a few points. Howard Fineman clarifies the fine men or Frank & Obamba not to mention the Governor in Rendell link. While the beast was the unicorn of 60 yet not meek Senator Stabinow, not to mention the Ouch of Geek Irony.]
[translation of apologies/index of links]
mirror: Matthews/Dean Hardball
beasts: Maddow/Stabinow unicorn filibuster
ouch moment: Maddow/parody of TeaDay
Fine Man: Maddow/Fineman Frank Obama
Governor: Maddow/Rendell
downe: Browne
Not to mention BTW: Ed Schultz/Huffington
Not: Schultz/Lanny Davis
Ed.:Schultz/Gibbs

And Countdown. Keith Olbermann/Gibbs et al.
Lawrence O'Donnell
Harpers/Gitmo
tasteless/Brown
Obama/promise?

Two Clever by One Third?

Or both ends against the middle?

Does the Massachusetts vote mean that the House should pass the Senate Bill, or should they reject it?
My view is it should get a vote, up or down or side ways* meaning risking some changes, risking the filibuster. Then the Senate can up or down it, or break it up. Speaking of holding water or breaking a mirror.

BTW: It is Senator Reid, not House Speaker, Ed.(Take nothing from the order of these links than that I do not recall which has Ed confused on the Reid/Pelosi positions in the process but great coverage and dialogue.)

* just as Ed Shultz was unclear about the ping pong potential this is as tricky a net, in the parlaimentary procedures that would offer this option. (Reconciliation or Nuclear Option) Up down before or after change, either now or in 2010. I would risk the now. I am unsure how the cloak filled rooms would navigate the choice. Could they pass a progressive bill and the Senate Bill and then let the Senate choose? But do not risk doing nothing and leveraging 2010. See Countdown Tonight 5, 4,... 1-20-2010.

[Psst...(Rachel) speaking of mythical beasts, I believe one of these links(Mathews) had Gibbs noting $4 billion or so in health care gains in the market today[*], although other reporting (Keith) shows a market loss overall, but at least Barney Frank got the mess- age. Hmmm?]{Ouch: Moment of Meek to Fine Man?} (and Governor Ed Rendell say and does go downe.)
[Psst...It should be kind of hard for "Republicans" to declare a win as that word is kind of absent from his website. The same almost goes for the "Democrats" taking any responsibility when it comes to party identification]

[*](1-21-10) possible anachronism,(see BTW: Ed(9:45).) at least anecdotal(different sectors, different days?)(See comment 2)

The Nature of Things

This post was a holding spot while I had something under construction. And is a preemptive footnote and post CC(cultural crack) at the real thing.

[update: Hmmm. Go for an up or down vote on the Senate Bill! And I am not saying how to vote; but upon its passing begin amending from the Senate, upon its failure begin up or down votes on its pieces.]

See bottom Links (below) and Sea Shhhh Sherlock here.

[Update: the right take is left: go for it! And I don't mean the Right or Left but the balance of what is on the table, hold forth and adjust course and remember our routes(ai*) and branches.]

*(ai)as is as opposed to (sic) and to the healthy Executive, Legislative and Judicial balance for the people, regardless of party, ideology, divisions or cups of tea. Three cheers for the process, may justice be our do. (Not to mention A.I.)

Last Update? Yeah Right!

[Or Fair and Balanced Left? [Upon glance or review?]

The Nature of Things

Air America Today shouts Fifty-Nine!
It seems to imply that Democrats are off the hook. The moderate/independent middle seems to say that they want checks-and-balances which in turn should turn progressives loose now that there is a potential filibuster. Some have accused this middle of being low-information voters, but others claim them to be those that want the change they were promised or in the case of Massachusetts, those that have their health care and worry about the cost, not to mention jobs being a priority. This is my preemptive take from the heading, not the article.

Also the word Revolution has been bandied about. A caller suggested that the Reagan "Revolution" should have been a called a Counter Revolution. I would suggest it would be appropriately called a Devolution but unfortunately Revolution implies a spin that will continue unless there is real change. Now to switch a flat tire to a flat earth, there is a slippery slope because there is trickle down. That means that progress will always be slippery and up hill, or those that rise will only be on* the backs of others. [Correction: they do need the backs of others but they can't rise by flattening them.]

*scratch "on the backs of others": replace with "the burden of others."

[See "nature of things"]
[Extended metaphor: The ping pong ball is flat!(maybe it always has been, or it is more than about games and parties.)]
[BTW: a conference table can be round but it is still flat]

Vast Mainstream Conspiracy (VMC)

= HYPE!
I was actually[***] on the way to another link when the imperfect nature of things took a tangent to the Montel Williams comment above (HYPE!).

Hype* was already[**] on my mind, as the nature of the beast. Media in general not The Daily Ones.

* see bracketed by Remembering posts
** see comment 1 Also see bold roots(links/cheer)

*** [Subliminal Root or Cheer and/or (ofor) Market Forces in balance and action?]

Remembering

Martin Luther King, Jr.
[Local alternatives.]*

It is a bitter sweet time.
Meanwhile the world still goes round. (lyrics)
Meaning things are not black and white,
but we can dream
and work on the the scheme.
The American Dream.

* bracketed [update] (see -natives- for original comment and -local- for other references to King.)

These two could have something(in A chord)

(This material is now being posted on 1-20-2010 from a 1-18-10 email to a spot held in Save Now & bracketed by Remembering(s))
These two
Steve Clemons
David Sirota
could have something(in A chord):
at least it is not this,
Ayn Rand
Who knows? Oh, Brown?;
or this,
Mythification
George F. Will.

Oh No! Uh?
We sink?
Not again?
Non Sense
Move On
Warning for above:
do not get stuck on the ladder two.

Harmony?
Three Dog Night
Tenatious D *
No Whit Holmes! ***
Sixth Chord?

* search for yourself find holmes in lyrics

and ** sixth chord

WTShhhhh...
What(or where) the ** is the missing asterisk(no ribble?)

(The incongruous nature of this ** is due to minimal adaptations from email 4mat to blog, and the ribble for open ended reconstruction.)

Note: any future alterations will be [bracketed] and there is a bit of a ribble of error(and asterisks) in the last stanza after the ladder[sic] crack.

[remembering]

[1-19-10 Speaking of anachronisms. Spot saved between Rememberings.]
[Under Construction: Email material]
[interrupted by link work here (see * there)and then phone call from buddy(see comment 1 & ** also there)-different email matter-]

Remembering

Martin Luther King, Jr.

It is a bitter sweet time.
Meanwhile the world still goes round. (lyrics)
Meaning things are not black and white,
but we can dream
and work on the the scheme.
The American Dream.

Realmiffication

[HELP HAITI!]

The Butterfly Effect and/or(ofor) Real PC[*].
No tongue-in-cheek but... ironic misuse of powers.
Just call me cater-pillar-e.

(For the nuance * or culture** challenged, my apologies for making use of tragedy[***] but culture is often misused.)

* the last "culture" link and "misused" in this case will take one to the lyrics and the long version of... (a meditation?)
** Clash of Civilizations

*** unused(3) astral risks or rather correction to title: originally or intended

footnote: (3),applies to the title and TO mention :) asterisks and links; sometimes scroll over, sometimes right click, but bold and italics are hints.(also see comment)

[HELP HAITI!]

[*] asterisk for update to add link1-15-10: Real PC? Political Cynicism?
[**] also 1-15-10 (of tragedy)and error which are not always mistakes but lessons

Much ado

about something? (1-12-2010)
Read[*] and Wrong?
Not that I am reviewing but, sometimes we can learn from mistakes. While others just run. There is a vast difference between the Reid and Lott phraMING, not to mention accountabilities. Well, actually read Mention, not to mention Read(later). [Steven Seagal anyone? Ouch**, just "noting".]
[Not to mention...Ouch! I quip, youReid!]

[*] 1-13-10: (1st 3 of 5 bolds added)
My original nuance(intuition) was that Game Change(the book) might be worth reading. While there are alternative opinions on that, I was also suggesting that Fire Dog Lake may have made tenuous leaps. My tenous links are(often) acknowledged leaps that might later be confirmed. My tweak of "framing" was a prophetic hint at the effect on history and The Republic, which sometimes(more so lately) even I have had to work at retrieving.
[**]To which rather than ribble, I will just add Newt Gingrich. My original Read was actually Wright in light of conspiracies and abilities.
[Even a stopped clock is right twice a day: the comment (24AheadDotCom)hits two valid points on logic and getting things done over some very questionable charges, not to question the article which I did read(no pun) but the Game Change has been long in coming.]

Where in the world is Carmen...

Miranda?
Could it be...Real Mythication? Or a mixed fruit salad of bureaucracy.

Labels hint.

We have a heckuva'n updating to do.
[Sea Wall].Oh...really?

Real hint: Sometimes headings have meaning and sometimes they are just links that go deeper. Technical advances in formatting have complicated* literary(communications) styles, while sometimes we are caught in a web.

*not

Note to self:
no Navigation label below
see hint: recycle- ouch!)
[or links in Wall label]

[1-7-10:Shhhh! It is in the Senate Plan! Granted, not "single payer" or "public option" but... "national plans overseen by the same office that manages health coverage for federal employees and members of Congress."]

Who needs brackets?

Maybe a Turn a Meant.
I am not taking the Fifth but there is a sixth line in the countdown. Keith Olbermann recently added a new quick comment format. He is welcome to call it QCON. And weirdly enough I recently tweaked my own labels, not to mention Ribble*.

* my use of labels is inconsistent not to mention following up with the answers to my Ribbles, let alone defining the mixed punderstanding of nuance.
(Riddle: Ribble: Ripple) Now that is spin.

Ping Pong Congress

Or Diplomacy?*
**[Health Reform that is.]
Between Ed Schultz and his spin-off, NorMan GoldMan(insert 2nd hour today)?
If it is ping pong, what is the scoring system? Is it We against change or corporations passing the buck?
[1-5-10: David Sirota on Secret Plans?
*also adjusted Diplomacy link from.]
**[1-6-10 H.R. clarification added along with "check up from the neck" down, it doesn't ryhme but it is Rush via Reagan. Rush Limbaugh endorses overseas public options. My original spin on this was the guts that Ed and Norm have, and a crack at the "Nixon to China" philosophy and the Obama to Corporations hope. (See My Comment)]
[1-7-09: see Shhhh!]

Holding Pattern

For last post see bottom link.
Last update, in this case SAME.

Last major comment.
[Raw Story Ron Paul "exceptionalism" heading? or Rubes teaser.]