Affordable Care Act

The pop or the leak?
By google, I don't know. Not to mention unwiki.

Bursting a Bubble.

Wind Energy vs NG
Pyramid Power?

Wind and Solar seem to be Natural Goods. Rising energy prices are seen as an incentive for alternatives. If you need rising natural gas prices to make wind or solar affordable it seems that there may be something wrong. Rising gax prices have not made nuclear affordable? I know there is no direct link there. But I must say the that it seems like bubble headed thinking. Now it may not be all about frackin' but there do seem to be risks to the environment. But the bubble I am talking about is the economic impact of any policy. Environmental impact is a cost that must be accounted for out of profits not as a cost of being at the bottom.

[A similar* pop or thought? * I am not sure where I may have misplaced the latter, but I did run into the author of the former.]

Iron Knee?

Or I Ron Knee?
My first instinct was based on, this can't be right, could it? I guess it can. But the Immelt to Jobs is like a Nixon to China ploy. Unfortunately, that foreign policy reference may have backfired a bit, military friction has become economic friction. But a better word would be competition. Or would it?
But really, I am conflating two fields into one, or is it a third? The Tax Code. While it is not all about who's at fault, tax cuts or spending, or economic or foreign policy, having the biggest con(I mean beneficiary of tax policy and foreign policy) pushing for an overhaul, we just may eliminate many loopholes and level the playing field a bit. And as for contrast, Obama to Libya is NOT the Bush to Iraq or Cheesehead to Wisconsin moment.
[On another line: Democrats can hold the line and compromise, as long as there is a line that some Republicans will greet.

RIGHT TO LIFE?

OR...

PRO DEBT?


Who's your daddy?
[Not encompassing...]
[Who's your maid?]
[Pre-(or Post) Nuptual? Not to get sexist or legal.]
[Oh those (darn*) laws of unintended consequences.]

* darn as in yarn (i.e. I forgot my tetrahedron.)

[Not to pun on intelligent design, but that is the law.**]

**spelled out

Leaking Intelligence

Why are Republicans Forcing a Shutdown of Government? This is the ledership to a preemptive thought bubble blown earlier. i.e. I thought that the Republicans are going to force a shut down because they have already blamed one on the Democrats just as the Democrats are about to present their compromise. Now this is not to predict a shutdown, but it is easy for the Republicans to predict one. And indeed it may only be in the Democrats power to force one. Just look at Wisconsin. Woops, even their out of state filibuster did not stop the Republicans. Now, cutting the jest and my tangent. Back to the thought bubble. The Republicans may force a shutdown to blame the Democrats, or the Democrats may force a shutdown to hold their horses. It seems that false equivalents, make it either the Trojan Horse or the Four Horseman. But back to my thought bubble, I just said that.

{Further leaking of nuance and exceptionalism, the so-called Constitutionalists, orginal intenders, and frackin' flip-floppin' neo-cons or Libertarians forget all about the Bush administration and the congressional behaviour then. As I have sketchily outlined the constitution and the war powers act and the partiot act, the president is within his powers until the law or the spirit changes it. How much Iron Knee or I Ron Knee is there that the UN Libya resolution is Numbered 1973? Or that the Patriot act was just extended?

BTW: Freedom is not a license, in reaction to or spin-off of Bill Maher, in respect to the requirement of humor for him and not Beck or O'Reilly, and I might add or Trump a few others.

Hint: on labels and scroll-over tangent I have not always read nor will I read (or reread)all links that are embedded in my blog. But I do wish to note them as sometimes serving as footnotes which I sometimes google post post, which sometimes may just be scrolled over or glannced at after clicking on to get the gist of.

[Toxic Leak? I am concerned with the roles that government spouses play. Not to mention Media Matters and its battle with FOX related to its non-profit status. But let me burst my thought bubble. The Republicans may not hold together on the ability to shut it down, but it will likely be another extention. I don't think either side wants to shut it down, but look who's talking.]
[Speaking of breaking or thought: here is the why, which will be inserted later, but it is for now to get the Democrats to move, and blame them for failure when the Republicans can move the line away a better economy. Stuck bubble: Should Corporate Executive go to jail for killing people? No, since corporations are people the whole corporations should. Just being facitious but really, they should be paying the same taxe rates as people, and have passports.]

Obama Doctrine?

Allow me to remind you of ledership and the rhetorical. In my format I use it to refer to the heading of a piece as well as a peril to progress. Not that I have embedded the definition here, I have just googled these(2 links) now. But previously touched on it here. And no pun here. But here? I will parse these later, but for now I will claim that it is a position not just a doctrine. Hmmm, maybe doctrine is the word that sticks for some, and it is not partisan or bi-partisan. One important feature is that a policy is not an action, nor a result.

[My last two links which I inserted are on the"peril" of "progress" and refer to the nature of power and intelligence, in the area of freedom and the hard work involved. Just as previous wars were fought under an information embargo of sorts, I do not know if that is really part of the picture now, but whether it is or not, the information is part of the format that goes beyond just the military aspect, to the diplomatic and beyond and back again. Meaning who knows what information will be used to what end or who will use it, get it or misuse it.]

Explaining Nuance?

I have enough trouble explaining my own, but Newt Ginrich tries to explain his. Or maybe I should explain tangents.
[for example]
[And back again: I will suffice to say that the ends does not* justify the means. And that while the means do not necessarily discredit the end, the means are never the only means to an end.]
* grammatical clarification as long as I intend it to suffice: the ends do not justify the means.
[search found Ginrich typo.]

Follow Up

3-25-11
[A] Trick Question of the Day? Whose Libya Policy is worse?*

[B] here is to the brave...journalist link added: It is important to ask the hard questions, but it is important not to negotiate or spill strategy to the enemy.]

[C] bonus feature links added

* Blunt Bolton 2012! OR Trump Bolton 2012
Odyssey Dawn 2012(No Princess Cruise)
[Top link and asterisk added 3-25-11]
[2012 Dream Race/Debate: Sanders Fiengold, Biden Obama, Trump Paul. I'm just saying that by attrition or distribution, there may be a shift in the political spectrum of the so-called middle. This would at least make for an interesting debate not that the organizational structure would cooperate. Fiengold might not be a player or choose this field of endeavor in rocking the party boat, Kucinich may be an alternate, and Trump and Rand Paul would have their own problems with the Republicans. Heck, there may as well be Pawlenty Bush 2012.]

[D.] Speaking of Brackets

[E.] Speaking of Spills, someone is getting a run for their money. Bored of the Day: Is it funny how 1996 was the year?
[See C. Supplemental/Flops]

[Final Crack: One of the premises for preemption was meaning what you say or following through. Well just how is Gingrich cracked up?]

[Bonus Crack: In all fairness it is not!

From the President, Monday -- quoting: "It is U-S Policy that Qaddafi needs to go."

From the Chairman, Sunday -- quoting. "It’s not about seeing him go," unquote. He added that the mission might be accomplished even if Qaddafi stays in power.

There is no inconsistency here: U.S. Policy is one thing. The Mission is another. Pure and complicated (and balanced.)]

Trick Question of the Day?

Whose Libya policy is worse?
A. Newt
B. Gingrich

I have often wished that there were more choices in these polls but this is as bad as O'Reilly or Beck. Sure enough Newt Gingrich was for a no-fly zone before he was against it, but that is being consistent. He was for a no-fly zone before the President got a coalition together, and he was against it after he did. Makes sense to me, in the bomb and then ask questions or become partisan world of Fox news and the Right.* For O'Reilly he gripes that if the President Bush had done what Obama has done the Left would have a fit. Well actually when Bush went into Afghanistan there was pretty much support for him, until he ginned up a false pretense for Iraq. It is hard to imagine Bush actually proceeding with following through on a U.N. decision or getting a decision that did not get a single veto. It is apples and oranges for O'Reilly.

[Bachmann Turn Her Overdrive.]

* Blunt Bolton 2012! OR Trump Bolton 2012
Odyssey Dawn 2012(No Princess Cruise)
[Top link and asterisk added 3-25-11]
[2012 Dream Race/Debate: Sanders Fiengold, Biden Obama, Trump Paul. I'm just saying that by attrition or distribution, there may be a shift in the political spectrum of the so-called middle. This would at least make for an interesting debate not that the organizational structure would cooperate. Fiengold might not be a player or choose this field of endeavor in rocking the party boat, Kucinich may be an alternate, and Trump and Rand Paul would have their own problems with the Republicans. Heck, there may as well be Pawlenty Bush 2012.]

Odyssey Dawn

began 8 years after the recently concluded Iraq war began. The original Odyssey supposedly began 10 years after the Trojan War. The dawn of this Odyssey is more appropriate than crossing the Rubicon. As Hal Sparks pointed out on The Stephanie Miller Show, it is precedence not presidents.**
[Missing Message of the Week]*

[Footnotes not necessarily to follow.]
[Meanwhile here is to the brave or sometimes insane journalists who are putting themselves in harms way. But it should be kept in mind that their intelligence as it is leaked is not only a strategic but diplomatic part of the engagement. This is a dynamic akin to a double edged sword, that may assist or interfere with the mission no matter who may understand it. This comment aside, it does seem another precedence as opposed to being embedded and under the influence. Or aren't they?]
* "of the day", "of the week", does not necessarily denote regularly
** on "verses" under the table(a nav guide)
[3-25-11 here is to the brave...journalist link added: It is important to ask the hard questions, but it is important not to negotiate or spill strategy to the enemy.]

Laughter is the Best Medicine?

This is not just a google of the day. It is about a search for meaning. It is not about two sides* agreeing so they must be right or the answer being in the middle of two extremes, but it is about what works maybe not being even on that line or plane. I take as a model, the constitution and its three branches, the legislative, the executive and the judicial, but what of they be, in the of, by and for? Well that would be from another speech but there is the preamble, not to mention the declaration. The point is that if two perspectives agree it does not make their agreement correct, there may be another perspective that gets them off the dime of the teeter totter. Not to mention if three agree it will get us anywhere, let alone progress or good. The recent UN action on Libya is a prime example of progress, not on the agreement that it receives in popular opinion, but that it is a change in the process. It is not a final solution, but it is an international community effort of which, we have only just begun to talk.

*on disagreement with involvment in Libya

[I take the stand that the President is within the spirit of the law until the law is respelled.]

[But myth** of the day? And based on two links back, this site is not necessarily a myth buster but maybe some reactions will.]

** links that follow are not exactly copacetic or flowing naturally, but I will point to the foundations of myth in this faux debunker. His arguments are too based on the myths that may be the subject of this piece. "Myth(one): Social Security didn’t create the deficit and shouldn’t be cut to fix it". Half true, and the other half not the only solution. Anything further may be besides the point. From Myth Two: "As long as voters consider(...), they will be." Well, duh. Fill in the blank. This guy is, in my mind,(using his own words)"... Exhibit A in why it is so hard to fix them." In some ways he misses his own myth or actual truth: "In other words, the myth misses the point. Whether Social Security continues to pay benefits at today’s rates isn’t a question of credit quality. It’s a question of politics and priorities." And his most destructive myth: "Which brings us to what may be the most destructive myth of all: The idea that Social Security is, fiscally speaking, an end in itself." And the height of I Ron Knee: "The discussion we need to have, then, isn’t simply whether we can pull the levers to bring Social Security into balance. That is easy." This might be Exibit B of mything with myths.

There was nothing...

necessarily prophetic meant with Third Time's the Charm. Or was there? It may have been the spin-off of either or and the likes of Beck and some evangelicals. Even just in the either or of "I'm just saying", which might be related to a silver lining, which only has three sides. There is the light, the dark and the actual cloud that matters. [SAVED IN DRAFT & CONTINUED & SUBMITTED 3-22-11) Third Times a Charm, means that if you look right, look left, cross the street, and there is a chicken already on the other side, you may have learned a lesson...or not. Not to be making light of recent tragedies, but that actually is the point. That nuclear energy is not on the same plane as air or traffic accidents. But back to the original point, that Third Times a Charm regards Toning Down the* Lines.

*Or were we?

[SUB-TEXT: the table and I Ron Knee.]
[Update: my original assessment before the air strikes began was that the President was following the letter of the law if not the spirit. I won't get into the spirit of the Patriot Act but is part of the law as well as the 1973 War Powers Act and the constitution. My point being that it is one thing to debate an action by the president, it is another to make a law determining or undermining his powers. Any reassessment will have to take into account the current politics as well as earlier circumstances not to mentiuon the politics then. It is that frame in which I am optimistic that change matters as well as who is in charge.]
[Footnote to power and politics not to mention economics.]
[Not exactly breaking, but one reason going to congress would not make sense. Would it make sense to make doing the right thing even more political? Would it make sense for journalists to be giving detailed intel to an enemy? The right thing being to save lives rather than waiting for a massacre. It can be wondered well why not other places, well then get some consensus, but some are in the past and others may be prevented in the future or nothing may change. And there may be a bonus feature[**] in this turkey on the table and that is the subject of war funding and the budget process or complacency.]
[**] 3-25-11 links added

Frank Knight

Ben Stein noted this in an NCAA pregame commercial. Too bad I forgot what it was for, unless it was a public service message, and too bad the Washington Huskies lost in a squeaker that may have hung on a bad call by the refs. Now back to ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ.

Oops,
My Bad. Actually [*]...
they may be right, but not necessarily to the extent[**] they believe. Ten hours of sleep per night? But who knows?
[And in memory of the Triangle Shirtwaist fire.]

[*] 3-21-11: links re-figured with bold and links here added, plus Oops realigned.
[**] note by association

Toning Down the Lines.

Just in case it was not clear, my Waiting for [Calm Cast] was not just a metaphor, and Comcast did arrive to increase my signal strength by toning down my lines. Hmmm. That works. But what I also wish to make clear is that while some may rightly argue the wisdom of another involvement in military action that the tone and approach are totally different than recent actions. If Congress wishes[*] to have a different view, they may need to take certain measures to make clear where military action is appropriate, until that time the Commander in Chief is responsible (for) foreign policy, upholding international treaties and the U.N. charter. Now I also need to sort out a few of these links, but my point is that this time our action is only as a leader of a united concern that is a bit clearer than recent actions, and those with veto power in the U.N. did not use their vetos. Of course actions may evolved based on certain reactions, but that is the nature of putting things clear or on the table.

[*] bolds and (for) added 3-22-11

Waiting for [Calm Cast]

[...]
In [brackets],
this is a big deal.

By this I mean, yes I am actually waiting for Comcast to check on the strength of my signals. Meanwhile, the President has taken some guff for his ESPN time, [yet] he did kill two birds with one stone by making a plea for aid to the triple disaster in Japan. And by "big deal", I mean the UN vote not getting one veto of its resolution for use of "all necessary measures" to protect civilians in Libya. This may be the un- mess age. It may be about the choices we make.

Now...before I embolden the most need to read or view, I will add that I did not* have all these links when I hit the keyboard this morning. My point is that waiting for the right time to...

[QED/FOOTNOTE: A subsidiary point is that no matter the actions even the president takes, we just can't win without the butterfly(see NOT) of politics. Even this QED was not about finetuning the general idea, until it flapped its wings and did more than footnote. It was actually about the idea that I only had a footnote and the above needed no more.]

* double negative? On point of having message before hand(or (maybe not).

[UPDATE: Comcast** is yet to arrive, [and NewsNation has yet to have clip available] but the President just made an announcement. He is bridging the signals gap and being a uniter not burning Bush.]

** yet this is a convenient(or inconvenient) thread (or what)

Think Blue

Click Green. That's right or at least it is wiki.

Duh...Trinity. I use the above for segue...


[3-1-11 View of Airport Vortex(foreground right slope) to Bell Rock Vortex(distant smallest peak just right of center)]


[GPS: Closeup of Bell Rock, Looking back from Bell Rock.]

As I listened to Thom Hartmann, there is an appropriate* tangent to investigate later. As a caller pointed out it, is not about the rich and the poor, it is about people and capital. Would that be Cap I Toll ism?

*or maybe just interesting; not only in the nature of the trinity** of vortexes, but the wearing of the green or the red.

** self/others/balance
[Missing link : of google journey.[Not really even chaos.]

I Told You So.

NO... a lot of Frackin' People told us so.
[See CAUTION below]
In particular Aristotle and his physics not supplanted till Newton.

Just where am I coming from and where am I going? Good question, but for the moment I accidently clicked on a number of years ago and hit upon examples of the ongoing interpretation. [Interpretations and rules of power.(Or Not)]

[BTW: I have a few labels to catch up on, but I will make another connection. Prior to the earthquake, with the passing of David Broder, it occurred to me that one should not feel a loss, based on which side of the political spectrum(or geography) one is on. Not that it does not matter to many people. After the earthquake it is still all about how it effects us, not about how it impacts those that were closer to the problem.* But it is not wrong to politically learn from tragedy, or just plain expect be the cause. Not that I connect the cause, but there are laws, and always time for pause.]

* not to minimize nor distract from the Japan suffering, but it is very ironic that Ronald Reagan a product of GE, had his nine most dangerous words ("I'm from the government and I'm here to help.") and then his namesake USS Ronald Reagan has to navigate the perils of radiation from a product of GE.
[CAUTION: Some these links may be sensitive or insensitive** depending on you're own perspective, but I will add that some may be sufficient just to scroll over or click on for a hint of mine, and look forward to parsing or bolding some for better focus.]

** Lewis Black On Broadway? Frackin' or Bleepin' not employed, it will be the real deal(meaning not deleteds).

What are the Frackin' Odds...

it's the frackin' spin!(?)

Well actually the original intent was the timing thing.

What are the odds, if you listen to Stephanie Miller and you google, you will find. Now...actually* before I take too many tangents I will simply fade...
(but with the intent to later find three points indicate a circle.)

...but it was not a tangent, it was the punchline of the google crack above.
Rather than explain the tangent or run the odds**, I will just note the connection point of contact in Exceptionalism.

* this was an odd thing and find. Below the you listen, and you google are what I believe few knew if it is true. That when Obama was blamed for saying there were 57 states and that that was Islamic, that there were actually 57 jurisdictions in the electoral process including uncommitteds?

**run is a pun on Runes and odds is a play on THE Pythagoras WAY.
[It is awkard to reflect the actual timeline but I did finish this post, and not POST it till I remembered to POST The Tetrahedron? post.]
[And wish to note that I am very concerned about Japan, but is there ever a time to let one's guard or humor down? But all humor is not created equal, let alone meaning.]

[BTW: Is there any meaning in Frackin' being a play on words, math, and related to energy? I will let you search for that, but it is not the ribble. Nor was it my intent.]

The Tetrahedron?

Power On Demand?
From Martin Bashir to Dylan Radigan:
From Celebrity to Cheeseheads, from Mel to NFL.

Navigation reminder:
From 4mat to GeOhMeTry,
I is the word,
II is the association with politics and culture.
Bottom Link records last posting, time stamp will reflect original draft.
Then there is the Declaration and the Constitution and the Three Branches, and what 4? Of, by and for.
[THIS IS POSTED AS IS ON 3-15-11]

The Segue

TryAngulation: in draft
Reservations times three.
[Publish Post: 8:47 AM no link, labels or any more below yet.]
[I have yet to read the "yet" for a third time, which was not my original intent, but as long as I have gone this far holding it in draft, I will. But I have now added the link at bottom which represents the sequence or actual timeline of posting. Still no labels. No duh! Not to mention Frackin' Wisconsin. Speaking of Timing, sometimes you have to be there.]
[It turns out this may actually be a segue which will cycle back to the yet. Meanwhile...]
[See Comment One]

[OK, finally posted, I will follow-up with the Triangulation or Tetrahedron later, meanwhile I need to work on my own segue.]

Third Time's The Charm

[Finally posted 3-14-11 ]
Three times lucky? Actually I have not been lucky in finding the origin of the first, but I have been several times knocked off course. Just as I wrote this the news was noting the passing of a local law enforcement officer who had three centers of gravity, friends, family and work, so is that the message? "Every cloud has a silver lining" has also recently infiltrated my blog. That is credited roughly to John Milton and Katty Macane.

Numbers may play a big part in superstitions, but they also may play a big part in meanings. Past, present and future is just one case for threes, though not necessarily in that order, and this is not just to play with words. Of course if superstitions play any part in society, they will play a part in words, and words play a part in meanings, but which comes first? Some of this math and meandering came to my attention in regards to politics. Have you heard of the third way? The Clinton Adminstration was the first occasion I became aware of it in a political form, not that I had done the math in regard to other departments. But basically there are the two ends of the political spectrum and then there is the centrist. But is it the people, the target or the answers that are there? Or is it target, people or answers...who knows? However at this time I intend to apply it to the topic of navigation, or at least The Myth of Triangulation and wonder if a silver lining plays into any of this. While it is plane* to see where three plays into many things, it should suffice to read Robert Reich's article yourself as I have now read it twice. But I have yet to revisit the concept of navigation itself or any application of the tetrahedron to other perspectives of improving on our picture.

*pun on points

Crossing the Rubicon

was a matter left unlinked. [Correction 3-23-11] But it has to do with Stephanie Miller's topics and guests and standing strong against the Little Caesars.

Japan Earthquake 2011

Ledership?* Not to ponder. I pun on journalism, as the heading is called a lede. I broach this piece with the tragic news of the earthquake in Japan, where I have family as well as tsunami, in Hawaii where family is also located. Expressing our thoughts and prayers for the impacted are what was difficult about understating or even blogging about it.

Yesterday's post was quite involved and spun off of and onto other threads of thought. Not that any of that had to do with what may have been record winds in our neighborhood and record rain the previous day in the region. But I will close for the day and get on with my intended schedule with only an update on The Curve or Nuance Thing.**

[Tokyo Broadcasting (TBS) Ustream
Earthquake Google Sources
MSNBC Quake Info Technology
The Asahi Shimbun Newspaper]

*original lede

** note two links under "an update" from State of Thought blog.

Today is a good day for...

...STEPHANIE MILLER.
Something about having to laugh or you'd (might) cry. I had a hunch this would start something, or end somewhere.

Speaking of Ribbles...
Multiple "Choice" Questions
The Fourth Law of Logic
Something to Ponder
Math is next to Ge Oh Me Try.
God is Good[*]with a missing Oh.

Actually this was a tangent from my original intent.(NOT) (or pond during)

But seriously(as if I am not): there were also three links from Stephanie Miller.(not to mention)
[* 3-11-11] today I note that at the time I was aware of the irony or maybe the need for a comma, or was it too vain an attempt, as an "o" really is needed to have the "oh", yet it revolves around "Something to Ponder".

Update

The other thing.
Norman Goldman promotes RecallTheRepublican8.

[And BREAKING NEWS: There is no denying the Wisconsin Senate has pulled a fast-one. The Budget Repair Bill which required the 3/5s quorum because it was a fiscal bill(which was the excuse for ending collective bargaining) was broken into two bills. The anti-collective bargaining bill which Republicans said they would not pass without Democrats was removed from the Budget Repair bill and passed(without Democrats).]

Death of the Middle Man.

R.I.P. David S. Broder
Ledership aside... that is my take, not that I always liked his takes.

The Curve or Nuance Thing

In this I am referring first to the Laffer Curve, which is propably not exactly a Bell Curve..

Now to un-nuance something or other.** The Laffer Curve has generally been used to argue that reducing taxes will increase government revenue. That is also called Supply Side economics. Reduced taxes(for the rich and corporations) will create jobs that will produce things and the economy will grow. Supply money, or not take it away, and it will supply jobs that will supply products and people will buy more. A better economy means better revenue. If people cannot see a few leaks in this theory, it is not just what I may have left out.

Not just the Demand Side, but also the debt side, the outsourcing, and the Wall Street or commodities side are left out. If money is being left in businesses and jobs, it is not being taxed as income. If it has a lower tax rate it will come out as income that will be spent, but there are fewer people in the top tax brackets to benefit the economy than there are in the lower tax brackets who would benefit the economy by having enough money to pay for their needs let alone their demands. Their decrease in taxes, or other income benefits,* would increase demand for products which would produce demand for jobs, which would increase their ability to benefit the economy. Now of course there are dangers to an either/or supply or demand(or any general) approach to the analysis. Then there are the debt, outsourcing, and Wall Street factors. Taxes are aslo a part of how these issues(debt, trade, and investment) effect the economy as generally explained here,(as well as in a more complex equation of the economy) as well as how changes in tax code may help the economy.

This has generally been more about how reduced taxes can help the economy. But there is the correction to the myth that all reducing of taxes increase the revenue. When that is more properly on the curve or in the equation, increased revenue will come from a general rise in the economy, as well as the proper taxation rate which will benefit the debt picture, which will be good for the economy. Now, too much emphasis on the burden of debt, trade and investment risks, must also find itself on the curve or dynamic equation of the big picture as well.

* two charts



** two curves in first paragraph: Ezra Klein and Eugene Robinson
*** yet to fully read, but a note on foreign aid as something to cut with only 1% of the budget. It just might fit into the above understanding of proper balance and investment not that it all is, but a cut in foreign aid may mean an increase or leak in another part of the picture above.

[I hope the above is easy to understand, but then there is the crack pot calling the kettle "stupid". i.e. Wall Street Journal and Bloomberg disagreeing with what Alan Simpson and Charles Krauthammer think.]

[Also Straw Man D'baits Red Herring. Thomas Sowell is right, there is no trickle down. That is because the money needs to be spent at the bottom, but where does the money come from? From the demand and the production of the worker.]

[3-11-11: two links (an update) from State of Thought blog]

The Other Thing...

is Wall Street, or rather the segue from the economy and colonial perspectives* is again from Ed Schultz.

Bottom-line or two: It is not about left or right, but pragmatic and fanciful.*** By this I mean in the perspectives of so-called "communists" or "socialists" and "free-market"tears. At the point that Dennis Kucinich and Bill O'Reilly can agree on something, maybe there is something for the artful dodgers. Is that preposterous or Tools R'Us?**

* more than one point of tangent, on the other hand.

** double entendre: which does not add upi.e. not an endorsement for the organization but maybe the hope, which may be a triple take

*** not so

[non hint nor footnote]
[but who knows?]
[Norman Goldman: Everything is on the Table is a fine slogan for No Labels(above Tools R'us), so Norman Goldman puts politics, and confrontation on the table, until compromise occurs to everyone.]

The One Thing

Maybe I am on to something.
Ed Schutz and fine tuning the message.

Tax cuts increase the deficit, redistribute wealth and only make the country look broke. Well...this is a bit better than my potential rant on nuance.(See Artful Dodgers)

[Looking back at the Billy Club thing: George F. Will weighs in on the Huckabee deal. Three things: George F. Will writes for a living, he hopes to influence the presidential race, and the Republican race in particular, not that I link him with the Koch brothers or question his patriotism*. Apparently George F. Will has a concern about the Imperial or Pro-Colonial (Huckabee/Gingrich/Palin) wing of the Republican party.]

*just a short hand for intent in general

Back to "The One Thing?"

It was not my intent to play on the "one thing" that Hucakbee got wrong in regards to British Imperialism, and the history as we know it.
Huckabee: "And one thing I do know is having grown up in Kenya, his view of the Brits, for example, is very different than the Average American."
Also: "When we elect a president, we entrust to him not just our security but also our story. The two are inseparable because our security depends on the story that we believe in, that inspires us, that we teach our children, and that we, as a nation, are willing to fight for."

The one thing was the chart and spinning off from that *, all things.


[While the link might be tenuous** in these two items, Huckabee and Economic Recovery, it can be seen in the flip-side of the two-birds equation: the economy loses, Obama loses.]

*Page 17: Q27 - a combined 59% of the people support raising taxes or postponing elimination of the deficit.

[Ribble =ribbing and riddle (Embedded in Q27, is reference to "missing link" in earlier post: where thanks to someone not getting me, I got more out of it. Not to be mis-understood as a reference to "the one",but maybe win-win...for Democrats and the Economy.)]

** New RNC chair is old Wisconsin Republican State Chairman

[Speaking of original intent or missing links: it is about the story and...Stephanie Miller***. (She or a caller maybe broke the story on January 25th: a timeline of sorts)]
[On another level.]

*** earliest reference

[American Exceptionalism and three views. In my view the Obama exceptionalism is what makes America great, not what makes it the next empire.]

[3-6-11: Media Matters for Huckabee whether on book tour or campaign , but is "brain slip" really valid? Yes, his true thinking may have been outed from his hours of shilling his book. Tells US: "These people should read my book and they would know what I mean..." Well thanks for the excuse, for all artful dodgers.]

Huckabee [update]

I have yet to see someone[*] make a point about the American Exceptionalism issue in regards to the Mau Mau history of Mike Huckabee, Birther Debate aside.

Well actually I found at least one...embedded in bold above, the rest I have yet to read.

[* 3-4-11 Not originally intended as a variant of "some people" which some media(FOX) are want to use as sources. It was more conversational in indicating that I had not heard anyone make the point that Mike Huckabee is implying that there was no British Empire, by defininition imperial. I may or may not get back to reading any of the rest.][Wonkette under Mike notes the "imperial" problem, as well as the Washington Post under Huckabee in 2nd update. Here is a Salon piece on Hucakbee and his Story-telling-in-Chief beliefs.]

The one thing?

[Right Columns Being Updated]

Well...
it was a chart that demonstrates the effects on GNP for various stimulative choices.

Translation:
Tax Cuts Bad
Federal Spending Good.
This of course is overly simplified, and relative to the position on the (Laffer) bell curve for tax rates.
Permanent tax cuts do not get even get half their money's worth of stimulative effect, while all categories under federal spending get well more than their buck's bang.

Speaking of "Killing two birds with one stone"...
Rachel Maddow [*] addresses the issue of Wisconsin and why Democrats exist(economic populism).
(Wall Street Journal/NBC Poll)

[Navigation aid: see bold link(s)]
[UPDATE 1-22-11 Keith and Rachel, D-part meant of Corrections and Stephanie Miller]
[Bottom Line? Democrats can stand strong and the American people will support them, and standing with the unions of Wisconsin and collective bargaining will be what the average American supports, the lopsided money and media to the contrary.]
[Potential follow-up: No to Violence, No to Prank News: But seriously.]
[*] my apologies the bold Rachel Maddow link has been corrected
[further Huckabee, Ed Schultz, Norman Goldman**, and Reverse Re-Verses.]
** must add show link for Norman