Red Bull...

Has Wings,

but it won't fly the GOP.

(Costa Con/cordia, Ctrl F "sinking".)

Papa mmm mow, mow, the bill is the word.

It it any coincidence that Wisconsin is the home of Paul Ryan and Reince Priebus, and Scott Walker?

[1-31-12: Tip of the Turnaround. Previous Ed* Show]

* previous Romney cracks in leadership: "haven't seen the ad"[!]

[It is sad that Reince Priebus believes that he is being funny, but I still can't be sure. (An Inconvenient Pie Chart)]

Republican Shadow Government calls for Obama Impeachment.

The Thom Hartmann Show, today.

Here are two further points. Not only is the crisis in leadership a myth in the form of the president not being a legislator and not being a unitary executive, but with Romney and his flip-flop of support of the Ryan plan, or rather support for social security and medicare, it may be the Republican plan. You see the trick might be that they can say anything, since it is not a law yet. Romney was for it before he was against it, but if the Republicans number one job was to make Obama a one term president, the substance of the bill was not important, because they did not want anything to be done. It would seem that Obamacares is a whole lot more flexible and must be in the right direction if they are running against it.

P.S. (Pre-Selection: Romney/Ryan 2012)

Crisis in Austrian Thought

Re-Evolutionally the missing link[!]

The crisis in thought is a split ideology regarding who is in charge, by George[!]

Think Washington the figure, not the DC or state. A founding father for sure, but the crisis is in leadership, and perspectives on the founding documents, not to mention Democratic Character.

Alex Witt's topics cross these threads. Including an MD/rX of DC?

{"crisis in leadership" Boehner, Bain or Bane or change. Mitch Daniels, not to mention Harold Ford Jr. }

[Breaking E-Mail: I haven't even read what it means but it might be the missing thought.]

[1-30-12: adding links, crisis,(2)(3)(4)* Ford, leadership**, there is a reason there are three branches of government and one is called the legislative, and it is not the executive's job to legislate, besides they can see the legislative ideas if they bit 'em.]

* not finding the exact link*** really, not yet

**Boehner: “Last Night Was Just Another Campaign Speech.” “He [President Obama] wants to take no responsibility for his policies that have failed and made no reference last night to really stepping into the game and legislating. He has spent every day since last Labor Day campaigning - not legislating, not involved in the process of our government here. And last night was just another – another campaign speech.”

*** this comes closest (sausage grinder?)

[Bottom line: there are two Austrian perspectives that come to mind, the economic and the psychological.]

Pragmatic Zealotry

See The Economist*.

(Obama Nation)

* in con / junction

(apples and oranges?)

[See comments 1&2]

"It's my turn"[!]

...is what came to mind as I saw Romney frame the race as a decision between the three winners of the last three contests. That's what Ron Paul(8:45) should say. Or maybe Herman Cain or Stephen Colbert should say it**. I am in the process of watching last night's debate on CNN and Rick Santorum (9:10)kicked off the debate with a thread that crosses another thought I had during the introductions, "We are a country of laws".* Actually Ron Paul had already started a few threads in his introduction, we are not nation builders. Romney(15:58) stands up to a Gingrich charge or rather a question on rhetoric and deals with it in legal terms. My original thought had to do with the irony of the conservative nature, but Gingrich is almost a false flag of rhetoric.

* quoting Santorum, not my thought or thread which I may have lost, but laws are the thread of building our nation

BTW- Not necessarily the missing thought: but in regards to Romney's financial reporting, does it bode well for his credit as a business leader, let alone maker of laws? I mean the mis-reporting, and his math regarding taxes and charitable contributions adding up at times to 40 to 45%?

[related irony (slash) update: what I thought was a churned media book event, may turn out to be good for the debate. What can we learn from Arizona? Will we take her up on it? Will the NAACP take Newt up on his charge? Just how do we demand paychecks*** over food stamps? Is it as easy as rhetoric?]

[1-28-12 In defense of PolitiFact... c4*]

[** 1-28-12 link added, Keep Paul Alive! (Courtesy of Buddy Roemer via Bill Maher.)

*** link added]

[c4* I have used as many asterisks as I intend but I would like to connect two pieces(or 3) which relate to the PolitiFact wordplay. Facts are facts and economics and politics everything else. (i.e. context and con text.) But more specifically The Economist has a perspective.]

Loose Lips and Sinking Metaphors

Footnotes PAGE Under Construction:

1-25-12

From loose lips to sinking ships. The Last Word hits the nail on the arc. Actually that is not the nail, but lip schtick, was on the horizon. It regards the history of the Republican Taxpolicy visa-vi debt policy. Not to mention Paw-lenty of Pie and Metaphor On.

1-26-12 [spin off of above...]

On the horizon, from G.H.W. Bush's "read my lips" to Bruce Bartlett's point: "1990 is the last time you had a leading Republican figure or President who cared about the deficit..." It is ironic he points out that the US is under the lowest tax burden in history compared to GDP.

More on Pit Bullies, in con text. Not that the gap in context is part of the con text, but the in con text(links) provide tripartite context**. In less embedded prose, bully for the Clemons piece, the Austrian pitting of Obama/Brewer, in relation to the Bush years, Iran con, and economics texting. While the final con text is the Standard and Pours[!] of the Neo-perspectivism on flip-flop and nuance. One try angle, another try angle. Not to call an odd man out, nor 4wo***man, but under the con I(above)ran a Just Foreign Policy sample, that takes a look at the dynamics of diplomacy. *

* not to be fair and balanced, nor brush off or in women,

the last three links reference; Hillary Clinton, Joan Walsh and Susan Rice.

** there by allowing 3 links to follow the pit bullies dynamics (2+3=5)

*** not to con grew an arc

(I plead the 5th in regard to irony[!])

[1-27-12: Related irony or booked signing?]

< previous post >

Existential Preemption?

Building our nation,

not policing the world.

My original intent was to link the Pre-SOTU references to Post-SOTU finds.

Not to mention Pop Culture:

President Obama* tells Congress Get it Done,

Not Mission Accomplished.

[I think the gist of my jest should be just right for the getting.]

*Ctrl F "get it done"

< previous post >

There is No Con in Team!

The President hit the right notes in the State of the Union.

No pun on what was left, but even Mitt Romney knew it would be a tool for his re-election*.

* fact-check: NOT (awkward Salon segue)

[asterisk excused: the "fact check" that was NOT, was more "political circumstances", while Salon was rightly pun and circumstance, not to pomp the re-election.]

[Speaking of double negatives and slight of**hand. Not to mention less*** slights.]

** from false flags of fear to, if wishes were fishes (knitting the net)

*** (reality politics[!])

[* NOT revisited: JB nails it.]

[Daniels nails it: Ctrl F "worse": see comment 2 and just plain wrong. When Daniels speaks of "worse" it can't be anything but just plain wrong. ]

[Following up with On the Economy(see JB)and more]

[and progressive REview?]

< previous post >

[2-9-12 New Page, unknown: Footnotes, Charts].

The State of the Job Report

Think Progress reports 19 facts that could be known before you watch the State of the Union.

Number 3, more jobs created in 2011 than 7 of 8 Bush years.

And just consider what would have happened with the help of Republican Leaders.**

BTW: I buried the hatchet by not using other words.*

* or what would have happened without their help(a pun on job won)

** I had harsher words or a flip-flop of help, but if congress had worked, or if Obama had not compromised

[THE STATE OF THE UNION.]

Update

Somewhere I may have noted that Herman Cain said he would have a surprise before the South Carolina primaries. I haven't found that reference, but I wonder if this was it.

BTW: I think there is a new Niche for our Cain 'n Able.

Speaking of Updates.

[Forest Gumption: Krugman / Capehart[?] and Trees of Chocolate.

Not to mention Martin Bashir and Heads Examined. Tea Party Nation leader endorses candidate who literally* in his own words, needs his head examined. Who wants anybody to be on food stamps? Certainly not the president. The Gingrich claim that Obama is the "food stamp president" while coming close to being... [1-24-12: I chose to break mid-semantics as to the truth of claims. Judson Philips quote: "if you want someone to be on food stamps you really ought have your head examined" yet Gingrich thinks that is what Obama wants.** If you think the NAACP should demand pay checks not food stamps, what does that make you? That is what Gingrich charged them with.]

*1-24-12 in con text m/un-con science links/break

** I Ron Knee? Not to mention con vention.

[?]

[To be read: Ryan Lizza The New Yorker, The Obama Memos.]

[1-27-12]

A Rising Tide

doesn't lift boats* of boot straps.

*mixed metaphor aside more parsing later

1. false resolution of uncertainty

2. limits of mathematical models

3. reintroduction of context/multi-disciplinary

4. inseparable from political

[parsing begun, straps** still being reviewed]

** Ctrl F Marginal Revolutionaries(previous references The Economist)

*2 Robert Johnson (see labels: INET)

Pre-South Carolina

Another debate, and the state of victim-hood.

[Update 1-23-12: Cain beats out Perry, Huntsman, Bachmann for fifth. ]

< previous post >

Will Lard 16:3

Dog so loved...

Calm adore Perry and the FOF Found- ation [!]

(sic)* series.[unspelled asterisks]

* Ctrl F: "(sic)" i.e. irony mark

[unmarked segue between line one and two,

with two bold links actually read this time, but with transliterated** ledes.. ]

** Well, not exactly, maybe transmitterated(sic), ala Costa Concordia.

3rd (sic) > BS*** "trumanesque"

*** i.e. blog search

BTW: those still standing

Romney: moderate/conservative flip-flopper

Gingrich: populist flip-flopper

Santorum: conservative

Paul: libertarian

This about rounds it out.

[But who am I to tell the GOP?]

[1-20-12: What is Governor Perry "talking turkey"?

It is the the pot calling the kettle white.]

Grey Out

LBO-news.

Wordpress.

Not Exactly.

Characterizations, caricatures and talking turkey.

Stop SOPA!

[Take Action]

[Home PAGES under construction: progress* adding items.(well not exactly**)]

*1-17-12 must date page (updated 1-18-12)

** PAGES not normal post features(evolving means learning)

Format Change

Just as I was about to rearrange my blog a format change has been triggered. As you might note, the link to the title or lede will get you there*, as well as Home under PAGES.

Item 1 as originally intended

Item 2 as previously top of posts and other sources

BLOG ARCHIVE is the most expedient navigation section.

But note E(blogger) box(magnifying glass) < search this blog > box in top left corner, as well as Labels below.

* at this point the default lede link is itself,

if viewed from Home PAGES (anomaly this post)

(image, charts, cartoons and photos to follow)

[Not to mention try angles.]

At this time I would like to archive two Republican Debates to be viewed later.

Meet the Press Video 1-8-12 (factc checks)

And FoxNews. 1-16-12

At some point I may move this page, but for now this will suffice.

There will also be a quibble about whether "Free Enterprise" is on trial, or whether it is Science Friction.**

** see George Will.

< previous post >

To Be Arranged

(Re-modeling) Right Column:*
postings and other sources**
Navigation 1st use
Navigation II 1st use
Navigation 3.0 1st use
See those labels below, as they may evolve.
Labels 1st use

IMAGE INSERTED (see bottom line)

[Post-image insert, note ledes under leeds must be edited.
i.e. typo sometimes let go, sometimes intended, but who knows, or vise verse us[!]]


For the time being I will leave item 2 "as is."
But to note ledes:
Primary Boogeyman
Pay Dirt / Tax Mud
Calm Pend E Um
Table of Contents
Churned Media
Navigation 3.0
Making New Rounds
Right To Life
Leaking Intelligence
Odyssey Dawn
There was nothing...
Think Blue
I Told You So
The Tetrahedron
The one thing?
Segue/Sabbatical
2-20-11 Under Construction
The Maze of Mace
The Answering Machine
Bridging the English Channel
Note: this is the content at the link Navigation II(see label) as of 1-17-12

*this will be item 1
** see comment (1 below) regarding template upgrade
[template upgrade has evolved my need for change]

IT MAY HAVE NOW BECOME UNNECESSARY FOR ME TO INSERT PREVIOUS POST.***
THE BLOG ARCHIVE IS NOW WHERE I WAS GOING TO LOCATE ITEMS 1, 2 etc.
[This condition may evolve as I play with formats/templates.]
Labels label added.

*** apologies for anachronistic asterisks (No TrippleA [I. e!])
NFRY = not fully read yet: AKA not necessarily to be read soon.
Also not necessarily a valuable label, as it applies so frequently.
Today's Alex Wagner and Andrea Mitchell, especially the latter with Chris Matthews review a lot of the haggling of the Republican Race(slash debate), context and hyperbole.(see 1-17-12 scroll down here) Speaking of LBO[!] See AM and Leveraged Buy Outs and links lost(I thought I had embedded it somewhere today).(not to mention up tight[a,b,c] or out of sight asides.)(see lost here and found there, under fanciful economics, but not nfry.)[Meet the Press/FOXnews]
[Not pun/link TrippleA a D'Ribble: A ribble is a ribbing and a riddle. Not always labeled. First uses: Ribble, further parsing of first uses may be problematic. But here is a shot at D'Ribble and G'Ribble. A D'Ribble is a De-Ribble with few permutations, while a Grand Ribble may be close to an Obama Ribble which was probably an accident.]
[Not to go on and on, but related to the pre-bracketed regarding NFRY and AM(slash)race "the nation"...]
[Speaking of anachronisms (See Image/inserts)]

Martin Luther King Jr. Day

For the first time his memorial will be open on his day.
Today I am refraining from ledership or word play.
But nature or nurture, it is also a snow day.
Not to rhyme or reason*, but not a bad segue.

[Word play & links* are more Google than nature or nurture.]

* i.e. results** are more Google than intent
** links are NFRY***


[Now with Alex Wagner or earlier.]
[Andrea Mitchell documents]

*** 1-17-12 see Navigation/Labels
(NFRY to be explained.)
[NOTE: To Be Arranged. i.e. next post
At the present time the BLOG ARCHIVE is the right column mentioned there.
I am having format/template issues, see Under Construction.(labels and scroll over or down)
Older Posts is a new feature.(1st uses noted in preceding links)]
I have been lax in following the Republican debates, not that they were worth anything till recently. It may now be different with the caucus and primaries begun. Ron Paul may have fanciful economics but the golden rule is key to our differences.]
< previous post >

In the Mean Time...

I will have to stop jam packing so much meaning into my posts.
One point, not that I will start counting, is that the President has put so much on the table, the only place to put more may be under it.  Even there may be a tight fit, what with the war on tactics and the given perspectives.
(A- B)
(X-Y-Z)

[speaking of fit ]

Seg way
[emphasis anachronistic: How profit(s)ic? ]
[But an earlier mean time.]

note: C-(s)ic  not the original intent of "mean time".
[1-15-12 meaning pun on prophet(sic) slash pro fits, and what fits on the table.  Speaking of seg ways, "This Week*" covers a few, while I am still digging into Occupy Seattle.]

*and anachronisms: George Will is surprised (at 42:12) there is not more money in speech/politics "considering the stakes of our politics in allocating wealth and opportunity".  And there is a good bit on context.



< previous post >

Under the Table?

The point is four legs[**].
Another point is that I have not posted them yet.
There just so happens to be four.
Not that they are Romney*, Gingrich, Santorum, or Hunt*[s]*man, let alone Paul.

*anachronism alert:
[**] done [As to in the process*** of coordinating the legs.]
[The previous four posts were rough drafted Thursday 1-12-12, here are some coordinated links.
Rachel Maddow, Lawrence O'Donnell, No Bain Or...]
*** [They are Rachel, Lawrence and Colbert, not to mention Schultz.]
[But the "under the table" is a reference to getting things on the table [!]

And the not so plane truth.]

[Sub-Text? Freedom is not a fool.
Here are the four posts:
Up Tight?
Triumvirate
Vulture or Social Contract?
Heterodoxy.
Or context?]
[And as usual Martin Bashir covers it
in his show.]
[Then(later)there is Dylan Ratigan, The War on War and Iran, or who ran?]
[And Al Sharpton with PoliticsNation]
[another four legs:
Center for American Progress,
OurFuture.org,
NewYorkTimes,
Foreign Policy,
and odd balance.]

*[s]* 6-10-13 Spell check?  "s" added.

Heterodoxy

The Lawrence O'Donnell Show / Chris Hayes

Republicans are saying what Obama couldn't.

< previous post >

Vultures or Social Contract?

Vulture Capitalism or the Big Three?
OK, the links take some thinking and twisting.

But The Last[*] Word is still rolling.

[*] note anachronism

< previous post >

Triumvirate

Maddow[**], Schultz, Colbert *

* found under "faux" search
(alternate /  search)
[**] note anachronism

< previous post >

Up Tight?

Out of Sight?
Or just jam up...
and dog-on man?

[Rachel Maddow]
*note anachronism

< previous post >

Freedom is not a tool.

Not that it is not a force.
Nor is it a farce.
But here is the source:

Freedom is not a tool*.
What is economic freedom?**

* "but an end that doesn't justify economics."
** what is "clear and unapologetic"
*** C-rhetoric


[C-schtick ] ***


< previous post >

Primary Boogeyman

Rule to the Exception.
Freedom / Hardball
Mitt Romney wins, Paul 2nd, Huntsman 3rd.
Gingrich and South Carolina next.
Huntsman ticket to ride or flavor of moment?

Yeah that's the ticket, but here is even more.

There is the old adage "divide and conquer",
but then there is the exception that proves the rule.
If Republican political calculus is anything, it is attack strength.
Economic Freedom is the key.
What it means, is the meme.
Absolutism may be the red flag of the Teddy Bull,
but the cape* of the progressive.

*Ctrl F "Nietzsche"

[Romney indeed made history as the first non-incumbent Republican to win both Iowa and New Hampshire, but given recent history, Fukuyama and the Neo-cons, it seems to fit the Primary Boogeyman frame, not to mention unprecedented Bush the Uniter.]

[1-11-12 CBS Christie Does Cynical Well, "Jersey-Style" **
CBS Poll Romney beats Obama,
Michelle Beats Anger.]
[My original intent here yesterday, was a Primary Colors reference, and a pun on Exception to Rule, not The Rule, but don't step on my blue suede shoes. (Reference post-**)]

[** I mean the Governor of New Jersey does "lame" well, if as Romney's "hit man" he is accusing Obama of not doing anger well.  Is that Neo-Boogeyman?  A flip-flop of the Doom and Gloom, and more of the Fear and Smear.  Governor Christie is the Sarah Palin with Lip Schtick.  Ouch, that was not to imply that he is a VP choice, but given the frame maybe.  When I use Hyperlink, I use Hyperlink. ]

[4a continued:  Freedom is not a tool***, but an end that doesn't justify economics.  This is my riff off of only the 1st paragraph of The Economist, on Economic blogs and "A less dismal debate." After reading it more fully(see ***) a funny thing happened on the way to the for 'em.  Actually it only hinges on the "tool" concept and the nature of "innovation" and the nature of economic debates.  Not that I have more than glanced at the debate example, but it also hinges on the nature of people as well as material or ideological forms.]
*** again note anacronism of 4m (see asterisks and bracketeds) as I evolved the post comma segment.[being in magazine 4m another one of the 4a.] (Note technical difficulties, uncertain if any threads or hyperlinks are lost, but I close in the middle of reading Marginal Revolutionaries in hard copy.)]


< previous post >

A Shot in the Arm?

A collegue recently commented on the difficulty or the desire to be objective.  This nails perspectivism on the head, or is it the cross?  From neo-perspectivism through neo-nuanced and neo-platonic we do have a dynamic*** of global balance.  More sorting later*.    Thus spoke Niche?

* 1-9-12  correction (not two Chinas: two perspectives.)
BTW:  Thus spoke Adam Smith.
D'Ribble[!] Which came first the crossroad or the chicken?**
Henwood/More?  More's the Pity?

[On the other arm, a nemesis may have stubbed a tow(sic) on the plank the nail sticks out of.]

[Speaking of Ice, Thom Hartmann is in Iceland and provides some of the neo-perspectivism.]

** 1-10-12 link added (plural)
*** also maybe plural(see Hartmann/neo-relativism?) dynamics?
[edit notes: Ctrl F "the cart"]
[Also Ctrl F "Descartes" and the four horsemen?]

[Note: I have been lax in my boldness of links as an aid to navigation or sense of the thread.  In that regard I finally bolded two.< now 3(!) >  Also my asterisks and [brackets] are time relative or sensitive. i.e. to flow of the read. Now I will also note the relative flow of neo-platonic, neo-perspectivism, neo-liberal, neo-con, neo-nuanced and neo-relativism, not to end with six, name names or Ctrl F.  BTW:  Excuse me if I don't go to the trouble of flip-flopping the tetrahedron, that is the point.(Ctrl F "the people" and "the constitution".)]
[Speaking of a4 or timing, my 4a brought me another F, if not CF.(Note grammar, numbers, shapes, timing, etc.) F is TBA. Not to mention ? Nor Kidding. In closing (?)(!) Or too close to the 4close or Bane?]
[Third Bane's a charm? i.e. convention, congress, cain ? ]
[Speaking of Bane and Try Angles or Flip Romney and flopping it.
BTW: Under the Flip link there is an accounting or statistical trick that is not unknown to the debate.  I won't play upon it, but it involves the "average tax cut" versus "the middle-income American."  It is mathematical hyperbole as well as reasonable, where reality is even more confusing.  It is more accurate to say that the richest are paying a lesser per cent of their gross (actual tax rate) than any other income category after the  standard deductions and other taxes are accounted for.]

> previous post <