Scatmonger?

I am not going to say, I saw it coming,
nor take responsibility for the May day of Ed,but there may be a silver lining.

Hint: Platonic Dialogue under Bat Cave.
It's not a quid pro quo for turning or tipping the tables
and it's not all that.

Memorial Day

Never Forget!


(August 29th, 2010 New York)

What is a slut?

Tracy Clark-Flory in Salon draws an interesting conclusion:

The trouble is that everyone has a different idea of where that line is. It's all very subjective, because how many partners is too many? How much cleavage is too much? When does flirting cross the line? As feminist activist Jaclyn Friedman explained in her SlutWalk Boston speech, "That's how the word 'slut' usually works. If you ask 10 people, you get 10 different definitions" -- and, of course, therein lies its power.

I won't define or defend the word or its use. But my original comment or lede had to do with Trumping the word, or flushing a show. There is no profundity in having to explain, not that either are funny but it is about breaking things.
[Saved in draft till 5-31-11]
[Over the weekend, I was ranting this ribble with a friend and really got riffing, or was it flushing. But I also pondered the genderless generic form of a "slut". Not until today did the word "monger" present itself to me. Somewhere before(of course), the word "scatology" may have entered the rhetoric. So I believe that the most useful appropriate word for the likes of most right wing talk peddlers, is scatmonger, as opposed to...well, I guess the left can have some scatmongers, but if it were understood how a septic tank works, it might be different.
[This is a deeply embedded and plumb'd ribble, with leaks in italics, and may be clarified or upgraded(updated) upon review.]

Moore on the Table

Michael Moore jokes about what's on the table.
My Reply:

Hats Off to Moore and Clinton, but the former(Moore) jokes or charges that social security should not be on the table. But I maintain that it is and should be. But of course that depends on what your definition of "on"(the table) is:

Yes everything, including Social Security is on the table! If Republicans can put their Tin-foil Hats on the table and Democrats put their Cheesehead Hats on the table, then ending corporate welfare and tax breaks could solve everything. That is a big if, if not a bigger could. But that is the politics of the table

[Less on the Table: Republic Cons]]

Ironoclast[!]

Irony + Iconoclast NOT [/?]

OK, mixed characterizations.
Bill Clinton, Mitt Romney and why 1992 matters for 2012 *
The big debt lie
Clinton Chimes in on Health Care.
Not to mention Ally Gory

But mostly this is about the previous Obtusity[?] and the embedded Obliquity, via triangulation and Geometry.

On the other hand: less tergiversating "Orderly!" i.e. "Bring 'em on!"
[Foot Loose]

* Romney may be a Clinton, but he is no Obama!

Obtusity?

Not Here.(Kay label added)
Nor Here.
But in context the former Here is the proper angler.

In a less embedded aside, Leonard Pitts Jr. hits the nail on the head of American Exceptionalism.

In another arena, a friend noted how trustworthy FOX and Bill O'Reilly are. Well, 28% and 9% are far from a margin of victory unless you are looking for an American Icon. NBC, MSNBC, CBS, and ABC combine for 29% while CNN's Cooper and Blitzer match O'Reilly's 9%, and the a4mentioned other network's hosts(Matthews, Brokaw, Couric and Sawyer tied) combine for 12%. So it is only in the winner[*] take all, not knowing what it takes world, where follow the leader matters. Now that is a real Laffer Curveball! Or is it?

[Then there is Pawlenty of problems. Bottom line: if money is a maker then tax it as much as labor. That is an inverse paradox or maybe praximoron.]
[The bottom line is obliquity with intent.]
[Sub** Text]

** asterisks apply to that link, but is not the missing link, but does fit the leadership narrative over people.
[*] boo yeah! Stewart boosts O'Reilly's ratings(**), which likely rigs poll. i.e. maybe FOX viewers are more fair and balanced when the left is presented.
(**) I don't have the Nielsen ratings but it might be reflected in the poll.
[Footnote: scroll over some links for some understanding, but unfortunately links that may need clicking on do not last forever. Hence I hope to be less obtuse but no less oblique in the future. There should be no joy in mud-ville, as the outcome of the NY26th shows, as divided meta(for) prevails. But to unembed these analogies, the Ryan plan was the issue in the divide to lose in New York, 48% takes it, while the issue will next be before the U.S. Senate with Democrats in the majority and Republicans faced with laying their votes on the line. Some will leave the sinking ship, diluting the lemonade. If I may make a few Truman references it is not a direct analogy, but hanging their votes on their necks will be like dividing to conquer.]
[Meanwhile Up-Date]
[Speaking of not Truman--something about:

If it's a choice between a genuine Republican, and a Republican in Democratic clothing, the people will choose the genuine article, every time; that is, they will take a Republican before they will a phony Democrat, and I don't want any phony Democratic candidates in this campaign.

With my lemon twist on it:

If it's a choice between a genuine Moderate, and a Moderate in Republican clothing, the people will choose the genuine article, every time; that is, they will take a Democrat before they will a phony Moderate(update 10-11-2011), and I don't want any phony Moderate candidates in this campaign.

OK, it loses a little bit of it's zest, but that is the nature of the slippery-slope, trickle down, lemonade, mudville.]

[Update 12-8-11 The Last Word? As it seemed to line up.]

GPS

Good Progressive Strategies?
Green Purple Systems?
American Exceptionalism.
Three Signs of a Profit Sea?
Now this is not just a wisecrack, but I have yet to retrieve the link** where I recall a reference to prophetic narrative* having three ingredients. It was in the context of a previous post, but I am unsure if I embedded the link or it was left behind. Speaking of fringe or conspiracy theories(...)dot dot dot

* emphasis on the narrative

** I will post it here(when found) to be clear that it is not one I have embedded so far(Not to send anyone off on a wild goose chase, ne ribble, but if any one does recall any recent reference to, I believe 3, elements of a prophecy, please comment.) As I recall, they may be fear, convincing, and fulfillment. Yeah, that may be the ticket of original intent.

No Teddy

No Bully* Pulpit.
Disagreement and innovations.

Main Stream Perspectives:
CBS
ABC
PBS
Huffington Post
Salon
Washington Post
YouTube
Boston Globe
"Contensions?"(sic**)
More Follow Up.

[Mean-while up date*** No Rapture.]

* Mika 1 Joe 0 Are you serious, Joe?

** counter intuitive: Bully Pulpit is a good thing, like American Exceptionalism, unlike the link or the namesake.
*** and I did not see the Herman Cain link before my Teddy reference and there is no relation between my pen name LeRoy-Rogers and the therogersinsitute, nor Newt's middle name (Leroy).
[See ** "Are" yes I may be. Apologies for the multi-dimentionalism again, but in regards to Newt and Libertarianism, I think that it could be called Tea Party Nuance, and Ginrich is attempting to be the Obama of the Right(or the No Labels of the Right), while I am somewhere not between Keith Olbermann and Ed Schultz.]
[Profits verses Prophets(Chris Hedges) and more.

[The square of the esoteric.

Strauss on reading In 1952 Strauss published Persecution and the Art of Writing, commonly understood to advance the argument that some philosophers write esoterically in order to avoid persecution by political or religious authorities. A few readers of Strauss suggest esoteric writing may also seek to protect politics from political philosophy -- the explosive reasoning of which might well shatter fragile opinions undergirding the political order. Stemming from his study of Maimonides and Al Farabi, and then extended to his reading of Plato (he mentions particularly the discussion of writing in the Phaedrus), Strauss proposed that an esoteric text was the proper type for philosophic learning. Rather than simply outlining the philosopher's thoughts, the esoteric text forces readers to do their own thinking and learning. As Socrates says in the Phaedrus, writing does not respond when questioned, but invites a dialogue with the reader, thereby reducing the problems of the written word. One political danger Strauss pointed to was the acceptance of dangerous ideas too quickly by students. This was perhaps also relevant in the trial of Socrates, where his relationship with Alcibiades was used against him.

Ultimately, Strauss believed that philosophers offered both an "exoteric" or salutary teaching and an "esoteric" or true teaching, which was concealed from the general reader. For maintaining this distinction, Strauss is often accused of having written esoterically himself. Moreover he also emphasized that writers often left contradictions and other excuses to encourage the more careful examination of the writing. Leo Strauss's favourite novelist was Jane Austen.[5]

This spin off is from actually reading the previous bold "and more" but is relevant to the Gingrich "Exceptionalism" and Obama practical and incremental. And Platonic Dialogue.(sic)]
[Spell Check Gingrich: left Ginrich for link & search purposes: but note Strauss to Chomsky philosophical dynamism(Wittgenstein) via esoteric Tea Party Gingrich attempt at nuance.]

We need Ed!

Top Left Search of this Blogspot. No pun or April Fools!
Ed Schultz has a Guest Host(Jeff Santos) today, but it reminded me to think more locally. Ma Bell?

OK, this is not a good start, but I must MoveOn. (i.e. this is heavily embedded with edutainment) Not pun on the (actually that usually means there is a pun) but the Other Ryan, is like the Other Washington, then there is the Other Bellevue. Kudos to Jeff Santos for having the dialogue with the Ohio Ryan(Rep. Tim Ryan D-OH) rather than the Wisconsin Ryan. (House Budget Committe Chairman Rep. Paul Ryan R-WI) Speaking of two Homers. Dough Nuts. Not to mention Other Simpsons. Alan v Homer.

Foot Note: DFA noted as well as...oops. Bully Metaphor.

Technical Difficulties

Anomalies or Synchronicities? By definition they are hard to explain. But there was first the missing link that I referenced here and then the Eli Pariser "bubble" context. Then there is the Wrap(5***) problem* and follow up **.

* in context is biased
** also needs follow-up and labels
*** anomoly (2) / anomaly(1) (W itch Are)
[then there is the Al Gore Rhythm Spell Check problem, and follow ups.]
(note: numbers in (brackets) are links as found in search to check any change in the algorithms C-W r a p(5).)
Note: Psychology Label added, Physics and Philosophy already applied(6), not necessarily used well.
[By Jove I may have it.]
[Speaking of hunches Gingrich may be wit Mitt. He may be making Mitt and others look good, and working the churned media for his own Obamanation.]

Thursday, May 19th, 2011
Technical difficulties is no pun on Speaker Boehner calling the government broke or Ed Schultz calling it broken. Or was it? Given the anomalies and synchronicity theories who knows? But it was about looking at my own modus operandi and then blogspot having its difficulties and Eli Pariser's TED Talk on the Internet. The word follow-up(4) may have popped up and is applicable(2 to insert here).

Friday, May 20th, 2011
Speaking of difficulties, I had to correct yesterday being Friday. I guess I get a second shot. Note Psychology Label added for reasons then above and follow up, references "rational expectations" not to mention talk and guts. (Bush v. Lakoff) Speaking of talk, yesterday's inserts (2 became 3) are economic talks(YouTube) from INETeconomics.org. And a reminder that problem* above is a Koch Brothers spin. And note to self** is still pending* while I might return to Risk and Robustness.

Since it is Friday and I have several posts in draft that relate to this link, I might note that this is still under construction if I ever get back to it. But in this regard I will say that this is the first INET link I watched and have found several others I might recommend that have been imbedded above but will simple list here:

Raghuram Rajan: Delineating the Role of Government
Also see prior ** not fully read yet but gives context right off the bat***
Lance Taylor: Maynard's Revenge
Reforming the Macroeconomic Framework: Sushil Wadhwani
IMF Calls for New Economic Thinking: Or Does It?

Keynes in a box? I will not expound upon this academic pun except to note the room and a flip-flop. i.e. what I took from Huntington and what Fukuyama may have learned or changed.

*scroll or click but nfry = not fully read yet
**Why I am not an Austrian Economist
*** see can(under bat)

[Not So Frackin' Funny: Demand a...side. (or Borg)Not Pop'nCulture]

Two No Huckabee

Mike Huckabee is another no trump.

NOTE: update of sorts (meaning I had not considered Huckabee for a long while)
Meanwhile: back to bridge.(Bold "bridge" is recommended link to watch.)
[Still to updated some links here or there.]
Note: unbolds may be only to read later or of slight reference use or scroll over

Update: GOP @)!@(2012) Missed Raising Cain.

One No Trump

No Bridge player*, I don't know how this Al Gore Rythms, but I will note that my first real bid on the 2012 race was just Friday with no mention of Trump. Apparently it is official, Donald Trump has declined to leave his love for business.

* well I dabbled a little

Calm Pend E Um

[slight word corrections on 9-28-11 but there was a coincidence that it is about lede or ship.]

Re: Friday the 13th.
Ally Gory of the Bubble.

On Friday after my posts, or it could have been Thursday, I was reflecting on the apparent synchronicity or was it anachronicity? Gotcha. Actually, I was reflecting more on my writing style or flow(hyperbole/hyperbola). Suffice to say, I was curious about the convenience of some of my searches when I would be in need of embedding some meaning. In particular, at some point I searched my blogspot for "blue" and was amazed to find only five prior uses, which is not correct**. (See Bold Bubble above) But there is a point that our own meaning is involved in our style which I will not reconstruct. While somewhere in this loopiness there is an AL GORE rythm, here is one segment unembedded from other work:

Fight of the Century may be the TOE in the door. (Theory of Everythink (sic)) No pun on C-sic. Not to bug you...
[Third times a charm or cut to the chase, I juxtaposition 5 links above.*
Fight of the Century: Keynes vs. Hayek Round Two
Why I am not an Austrian Economist
A new powerhouse for ridiculous GOP economics
Raghuram Rajan: Delineating the Role of Governmentand
Risk and Robustness

and you might scroll over (or not click) to get a sixth sense under Economix.]

* is lost con text

The main point is that there is an old acronym from IBM, about computers, GIGO ("Garbage In, Garbage Out") and the user is not the only one that puts garbage in, yet sometimes you just might get "Good Out".

** see "scientific aside" there along with updated link

GOP @)!@ ...(2012)

2012 that is.
Mitch Daniels, was my earliest hunch, Huntsman was a close second. Ron Paul was an early hope, but Gary Johnson beat him to the announcement. Now when I say hope, this is from the perspective that there be a good candidate for Republicans and the 2012 race, not that they should have any shot at being good for the country. This does not take into considerations any impact of a third party or independent candidate, or any political calculus. I don't find any references in a search of my blog but could have embedded some comment or link that may mention them. I associate Daniels with a Chris Matthews* comment, and Huntsman with some China controversy, while Paul and Johnson are libertarian. Which may be why I have been focused on economics and Ayn Rand. I would like to have a good de bait on neo-classical economics. It is hard to imagine Mitt Romney making it but then the longer the so-called libertarian or tea party candidate split the vote he or these guys could run the fish ladder, and it is hard to imagine a third party candidate that would not be just another spoiler. I don't want to do the political calculus to rock that boat.

* one reason I might scratch Daniels, but then again

5-17-11 Related links: Needless to say** Label
(Republicans 2012)
One No Trump
Two No Huckabee***

**Calm Pend E Um has a reference to an anomoly
*** Raising Cain

Biff Boom Bam

Platonic Dialogue.

[BTW:(2.0) Scroll down 4 my own See4 bin Laden.]

Current Media and
Super Heroes or C-Quells.

Note: blogspot is having technical difficulties intefering with the previous post being available at this time
(Churned Media makes me... C...(sic) hopes to be available soon, if not, I already have some sequels in the can.)
No pun intended, there is a missing link. Honestly the guildportal link was not heard of or googled prior to my lede, and I had no pow in tension.

NOTE 2.0: Sum Links are anachronistic some are re-runs.

BTW: Not to suggest another sabbatical, but this may be a good calm pend E um.

Churned Media makes me...

C...(sic)
I was thinking conservative or conspiracy...
then cynicism of Common(Sense)
Actually the Last Word was not so churned, it was rather calm.

But here is the Capper to be Fair and Balanced.
[Piece Out*]
[Speaking of see change]

* link updated there (speaking of Sea)

[Not to mention Countdown]

Economy or Economics

To SIN or not to sin?

SIN*:
Switch Topics
Ignore Facts
Name Call

Call it a Wrap?
With no bow on it, or aft?**

* rated X for economiX
(I should note that I was thoroughly entertained by the Fight of the Century, but it is a Koch sponsored production, and requires a fair bit of economics** as well as other disciplines to see that it is more inciteful than insightful. But the other links provide some other perspectives that I only have a hunch are more "fair and balanced" and not in a Faux or FOKS way. I have only begun to unRap them, but there is a pun in the 3 bows.***

** redone duncy Not! (actually this just might be the bow)

*** correction 4 is more on target

[NOTE: Under(see Wrap) and a fair bit of economics and NOT! are the links I have yet to dijest (see sic and pour ridge metaphor)]

The Interview

Strongly Parsed:- (President Obama's final comment on 60 Minutes)

And I think that anyone who would question that the perpetrator of mass murder on American soil didn't deserve what he got needs to have their head examined.

I could not parse more, nor do I imply con text. I mean that we can take this sentence as context enough(and with which I agree), yet we can and should question other's parsing and context for justice. [Pour Ridge Metaphor]

Updates: Head Fake or Syntax? Or childish banter. SIN: Shift, Ignore and Name call?

Temporal

Problematics
Rachell Maddow: more than just a perspective. Facts do change with time. Past facts are still past, but present facts will soon be. Not to pun on what will be, but Osama bin Laden's past was really not so much the issue. Nothing will change* the mishandling of facts and choices made by the Bush administration. (By this I mean the importance of not having focused on getting bin Laden when the Taliban made offers asking for evidence before September 11th, 2001)

*actually congress can change and the presidency did (see "hypocrisy" and "flip-flop" under can change link)]

[Dylan Ratigan: Mega Fatwah.The difference* between opinion and ruling.

A fatwā (Arabic: فتوى‎; plural fatāwā Arabic: فتاوى‎) in the Islamic faith is a religious opinion concerning Islamic law issued by an Islamic scholar. In Sunni Islam any fatwā is non-binding, whereas in Shia Islam it could be considered by an individual as binding, depending on his or her relation to the scholar. The person who issues a fatwā is called, in that respect, a Mufti, i.e. an issuer of fatwā, from the verb أَفْتَى 'aftā = "he gave a formal legal opinion on". This is not necessarily a formal position since most Muslims argue that anyone trained in Islamic law may give an opinion (fatwā) on its teachings. If a fatwā does not break new ground, then it is simply called a ruling.[1]

An analogy might be made to the issue of legal opinions from courts in common-law systems. Fatwās generally contain the details of the scholar's reasoning, typically in response to a particular case, and are considered binding precedent by those Muslims who have bound themselves to that scholar, including future Muftis; mere rulings can be compared to memorandum opinions. The primary difference between common-law opinions and fatwās, however, is that fatwās are not universally binding; as the Sharia is not universally consistent and Islam is very non-hierarchical in structure, fatwās do not carry the sort of weight that secular common-law opinions do.

*spirt and letter of the law]

[Speaking of timing, I mean Dylan. It is alsmost as if, I had already read these. Not. Actually I have read the last link here, before this Temporal rant, but the rest of the links in this bracket are yet to be read, yet seem to fit the bill or fill the tetrahedron, and a prior intent, or rather a comment yet to be found. Note on timing thing: refers to monkey see monkey do of original intent, meaning an email going around about the psychology experiment(a seam in time with the Dylan cracks), and how some people think they know better.]
[Note bolds as read in balancing act or narrative of labels and perspectives. Noam Chomsky, Paul Krugman, No Labels, Herman Cain, not in context of "more than as if not to be".]

Pre Post R US?

FOK NEWS
Al Qaeda
Jack in the Box
Footnote: No Trump Thanks Pap.
Not to mention mourning* Joe[**].

* my sincere condolences to Joe Scarborough for his father passing.
[**correcting 5-8-11] an inconvenient link, original intent

Justice?

It is more about narrative than justice.

Many will agree killing bin Laden is justice, some will call it an execution. Some say President Obama did not give President Bush enough credit. Some will say that he bin Laden deserves more. I think the poor ridge is just right. And to summit up:

As we do, we must also reaffirm that the United States is not -- and never will be -- at war with Islam. I’ve made clear, just as President Bush did shortly after 9/11, that our war is not against Islam. Bin Laden was not a Muslim leader; he was a mass murderer of Muslims. Indeed, al Qaeda has slaughtered scores of Muslims in many countries, including our own. So his demise should be welcomed by all who believe in peace and human dignity.

This is more than a mixed metaphor or mountain out of a moldy nursery tale*.

* link updated
[I have been meaning to focus on labels, updates and other project improvements. Here is a New Label**, The Golden Rule(also my photos) Also I should note my evolution from a lack of links to way too much linking. Hence the not so middle ground of this piece.]

** Now Labels label needs to be edited and updated to only New Label references. Now that is Poetic Justice or is it? It is another need to update or scroll over, to see the difference between search and labels.
[needed footnotes?]

[QED: Movement in one data point does not correlate with movement in another data point, especially when they are not in context or adjusted. Math is not a narrative, it is a process. Equations are more of a narrative but require enough data points and sufficient interpretation. There can be more jobless claims and more jobs added, which are independent of each other. OK, I have not QED'd anything but a hunch I just described and which apparently the data shows.]
[Semi-related? Calling it a gutsy call is not spiking a football. Let alone an improper linkage.]
[...not to mention right column navigations, scroll overs, see comments, labels and bold.]

My own reflections...

across from Ground Zero.


But an excuse for a party does not* a victory lap make.

i.e. sometimes it is about the party,
sometimes it is about the people.


[personal photos 8-29-2010]

*get 'er done? Got 'im.

SHOCK and AWE(UPDATE)

Martin Bashir on Aid to Pakistan [To the President:]

So before he is tempted to cut all forms of funding, I would like to remind him of the wise words that he wrote back in 2006 in his book "The Audacity of Hope." Speaking about the circumstances in which terrorism can flourish, he highlighted failed states and poverty as the two most important factors.

Not to raise any suspicions** but the mission has not been so clearly defined in original reports.

CIA Chief Leon Panetta, later Tuesday told NBC News, "The authorities(sic*) we have on Bin Laden are to kill him. And that was made clear. But it was also, as part of their rules of engagement, if he suddenly put up his hands and offered to be captured, then they would have the opportunity, obviously, to capture him. But that opportunity never developed."

But back to the issue of aid. See raise link.

Using stringent language, a statement by the Pakistani Foreign Office said, "Such an event shall not serve as a future precedent for any state, including the United States."

This is clearly a nuanced not "stringent language". But if,(and I mean A BIG IF) Osama bin Laden has been hiding in this compound for six years, it is difficult for the Bush administration to take much credit for the success of this mission, (let alone waterboarding). And while President Obama has been clear on the issues of failed states and poverty being part of the security equation, it is hard to expect Pakistan to be totally free of corruption or political and intelligence intrigue, let alone competence***. It is much easier to speculate and develop tin foil conspiracies that may actually be based on some evidence, and to use them to destabilize, than it is to change things at home let alone for another country. As the right seems to paint themselves into the corner of hypocrisy, the President has the responsibility of being the cherry picker and decider-in-chief. And in connecting the dots of the likes of the latest Right, (remember A BIG IF) then there must be some logic that the Bush administration must be further scrutinized for their part in a $1.4 trillion escapade of terror. How can we hold other countries responsible for competentencies when ours (and often rightly so) are so political?

* my (sic)inserted maybe "authorizations"?
** it is not the "fog of war" it is the fog of understanding and journalism
*** there is some irony in this linkage given prior asterisks
[Apologies for the nuance and dynamics of this threading, it is tricky to deal with the likes of some thinking, let alone journalism. And it was not my intent to necessarily minimize incitefulness or skirt a tin-foil issue or weave Teflon administrations.]

[While I may have great peripheral vision, I link the link weave last, but it was embedded in any above(3rd link).]
[Breaking news (which might be broken), apparently they will not release the photo of bin Laden, the argument is that there may be no pleasing some.]

[Further Embed Meant: Pakistan and speaking of timing. The death of A BIG IF?]
[Back to My TetraHeDron? Not Exactly!]
[Post Post In-put]
[Pre-Post er us in - put?]

Thursday, May 05, 2011
No Photos
"cathartic moment"
Now* to America's Future

*actually see not so Pre-Post er us reference to in-put(above). Also on Rumsfeld. On Stiglitz. Doing Justice?
[Important flip-flop or fair and balanced rearrangement regards the perspectives of Samuel P. Huntington and Francis Fukuyama. From Clash of Civilizations I may have cherry picked or perspectivized my analysis via tangential influences. While Francis Fukuyama has corrected his alignment from The New American Century, from renouncing the Bush administration to supporting and influencing the Obama Doctrine, it is not just ironic that the tag line for the issue of release of the bin Laden photos is, "It is not who we are" nor that the likes of the right see almost everything as a culture war. Or that both Bush and I were opti-mystic,(yeah right, he was) and why we now have hope.

SHOCK and Awe!

Shock to hear the anouncement by President Obama
that Osama bin Laden has been killed.
Awe at the amount[*] of celebrations[***] that have sprung up.

UPDATES AS DATED:
Tuesday, May 03, 2011

President Obama Announcement
Rachel Maddow , National Outpouring
Temporal Importance

[Daily KOS
The Telegraph McCain and Bush Too.]

Slate: How White House kept a secret.
MSNBC Pakistan "Double Game"
Today Show Yesterday Bin Laden is Dead!
Ed Schultz Fired Up!
the operation
Politics of death.
Executing the operation
Remembering the fallen.
Lawrence O'Donnell
Ground Zero
Pakistan
Bi-Partisan Dinner
Rhetorical Coolness. Just Desserts.
The Rewrite.

Monday, May 02, 2011
President Obama, No Osama.
MSNBC
CNN
FOX
CBC
Let's MoveOn!
Mean While

Thanks to some friends of Facebook for some of these, and some I thankfully don't use.**

Huffington Post
You Tube
C-Span
Salon
[Think Progress]
[Center for American Progress]
[Center for America's Future]

In defense of FOX News, a caller to the Stephanie Miller Show, claimed that there was absolutely no mention of President Obama on their home page. That is not correct. He is noted 4 times. And the video and transcript of his announcement about bin Laden are one of those, the second is a generic label for "In The News", the third an All-Star Panel on his emergency response, and the last an expose on "the one" letter difference between Obama and Osama. (Now Six*)

Navigational hint: go to bold links for Presidential material.

Speaking of live blogging: FOX Ups the Anti.
KARL ROVE: After Bin Laden's Death, President Obama's Next ...

[*] appropriately inserted last
[**] or rather last... noting the FOX Terrorist Threat, I am reminded of some inconvenient unfinished sentences or unintended sends of my own(De NO RAH O'Donnell tweet), but I mean reAlly?

FYI:
The news broke to me in just the right manner, straight from President Obama on the late night news. But if I had been online... Or a tweeter?

[***] celebrations

[Parting Shot?: Thom Hartmann has Gareth Porter on for some history. The point(Porter's) is that President Bush had no plan or intent to get bin Laden, not necessarily embedded in these links. My point is that Osama bin Laden could have been old news in 2001 but for the grace of Bush. If we had had different Pre-9-11 thinking, we could have had more justice and less tragedy and cost.]

[Updates: Ledes, Links and Labels added]