Torture Report

Senator John McCain makes a speech that is the best I have heard from a Republican that I can recall.  Just a few of those and the courage to hold to them earlier, may have changed history, but hopefully it is never too late !! 

USAToday
MSNBC All In

I'm not saying...

what ? [!] # *

Bane or** Tan Gents?(& gals)***

* un-embed ? ! ? :-)

** pr0-gress
*** not an endorsement of anything
[also... the opposite of congress is digress]

[DUC! i.e. CHECK "DRAFTS Under Construction", ouch.(GPS) Tick'd TOC?]

Mini-Plank ?


CAUTION:  R,R,R... No Texting while...










SEG WAY APOLLO GEE [!] 
[The layout of these images may depend on your own desktop choices(Re:dimentionalism.)  I was shooting for Romney(located) at the point of the cornicopia, and Obama at the harvest end.(until I bailed with an edit).  With a tip of the hat-trick and arithmatic or lip stick to navigation and the web we weave. ]



















[NOT EXACTLY]
(f..n...irony [!]  3, 2, 1...blast )
[Buy (X) George !]

P.S.  I only heard recently that The Stanger was brought to Seattle by the producers of The Onion.

First Debate: Zinger Score 2 to -1

Although I did not take an official scoring of the First Debate (Transcript) , two zingers the President came up with regarded Trump and SNL.  For Romney it was his "five boys" under the bus or at the President's lies.  "Never mind".

OK, so it really wasn't a debate for zingers. I happen to have heard the debate on the radio**, with only a few interruptions and don't wish to give them a grade, but only remind that it was only first of three, and try to find a commentary(Thom Hartmann?) that what matters is the post-debate spin.  Not that I will follow-up on the links here, but will suggest that Obama* will probably ramp up his urgency but remain steady in the next debates.

* Is it too late to score the Big Bird as a zinger?
[Re:FLASHNOTE (*there)]

**10-5-12  If it were a debate they would have stopped it[!].

"enterpreneurs are special"

Get this* straight, I am not playing on words or the specially abled.  Nor am going to cast all enterpreneurs as some of the best business leaders.  But has  Maria Bartiromo been noted** for her distortion today?  How many small businesses can succeed without knowing "this" from "that"? Probably between 75 & 94%.*** Or they can get a job hosting or contributing to CNBC.

* this was today where they misunderstood President Obama's "that"
** that was yesterday [7-18-12 Maria Bartiromo links updated including bold added]
*** But that would be only if I was limited to their resources.(Chamber of Commerce)

[Would Rasmussen do a poll, how many Chamber of Commerce members know "this" from "that"?  Already 75% to 94% don't know how the Obama care would affect them.]
[7-18-12 NOW with Slap-in-Face? "If I'm Rubber You're Glue."]

The Buck Stops Where?

Bane or* Entanglement. 

* This Week (his story?)

Dough Ha!

Michele Bachmann endorses Mitt Romney and Doha?

On the(not so funny) China front?

Update 5-4-12:  On the globalization front.(For later reading)(et al)
[Noun verb Bin Laden, and China Kristol, speaking of table ]
5-16-12 update tweet

WOE / Wae

War on Executives:

Romney charges Obama with "real war upon women".

Hides behind women against women.

WOE to woe-men!

Or War Against Evidence:

I am not saying that the Republicans are waging a war on women or that Democrats are not saying it. I am saying there are two questions which I will not answer, who started the war and who started calling it a war? I am also saying that I have not found the evidence in the links attached here, and suggesting that there is a war no matter who calls it a war or who started calling it a war.

I have yet to find who started the claim that there is a war on women. I am not saying that I don't believe that Obama could have used the term*, I just haven't found it.**

* war on women, war against women, war for women...'s votes.

[Google of the Day? Is it an anomaly that Steve Benen on Rachel Maddow Blog is the second hit for the question. "When did..." re-framed as "Has President Obama said there is a war on women?" Third Frame: "Obama talks about war on women." Fourth fishing trip? No War on Women. WOW! ]

[OK, I have an un-Warren Ted side trip, and not a cheat sheet. But just to be clear**]

[Jumping in the Lakoff! But Republicans cannot win the VFW.(Victory for Women or Victory from Whining.) It is a victory for wordplay.]

< Speaking of victory for wordplay, Thom Hartmann takes on the West word Hoe[!] >

** added 4-13-12 (** that is) Haven't found the President using the term but Debbie Wasserman-Schultz is quoted using it without full context in the CSM.

** Follow up?

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].

GOP Plan to Hurt Economy

Huffington Post reports that ABC reports that:

A Goldman Sachs economist has warned that the $60 billion package of spending cuts proposed by the Republicans to counter President Obama's proposal could slow economic growth.

[Bucking Beck and Bank for the Buck?
As I passed on to MoveOn the one thing that needs to be known.]


WISCONSIN UPDATE:
I'm not going to make a big production out of this but I see it differently than Ed Schultz**, who wants to hold Obama to his word about "comfortable shoes" and the picket line campaign rhetoric. I believe that circomstances are above and beyond the original scenario and he will be dealing with it more like Libya, behind the scenes and strategically and with everything at his disposal from a big picture perspective. That is not at all to use a violent analogy, only one within the bounds of his responsibilities and the law.

Before the straw that broke the camels back* and I almost violated my original intent here, I will simply add one (or two) more link.

* a computer or blog-spot glitch wiped out a more complete draft regarding mixed metaphor and big productions(original intent)

** loved his passion and intent though

[Speaking of anti-4-shadowing. Slippery Slope? See Domino Theory. Ouch.]
[Mean While In Pair O'Lax world: Beck on Democracy and some of us rather than "you and me"]
[Segue / Sabbatical - Out!]
[Speaking of Rhetoric some people are better with words than others. The exact words are always important, but there are different understandings of the whole process.]

Still haven't

read all links in the last post, but I will extend the remarks :

There is no policy that President Obama has passed or proposed that added as much to the deficit as the Republican Party's $3.9 trillion extension of the Bush tax cuts. In fact, if you put aside Obama's plan to extend most, but not all, of the Bush tax cuts, there is no policy he has passed or proposed that would do half as much damage to the deficit. There is not even a policy that would do a quarter as much damage to the deficit.

Ezra Klein goes on to say:

The stimulus bill, at $787 billion, would do about a fifth as much damage. But that's actually misleading: The stimulus bill was a temporary expense (not to mention a response to an unexpected emergency). Once it's done, it's done.

But I don't think that the actual "stimulus effect" of the stimulus package or the tax policy can be included in these numbers. i.e. if any tax cuts provide stimulus or raising them would damage the economy

[Let alone]
[BTW: Happy Anniversary to both of us. Political Punch's 5th, my 8th Technically I have not relied much if any, on Political Punch]

Dividing Not Uniting

[Held in draft since 6-12-09]

Republican Study Committee needs more study.
While some factions blame Obama for bailouts, another blames him for not standing with holdouts for a bailout.

Meanwhile Palin starts a war on comedy as an expert on double standards. What started as a reasonable admonition to David Letterman who made a disparaging joke that did implicate her under aged daughter, soon bordered on pandering violence. While this is a big stretch from Letterman not wanting to be caught "off guard", it is more innuendoed than the error of the joke(which daughter) distracting from its original distastefulness(to daughters in general*). Now will Palin go after Death Talkers or will Letterman go more political shock jock or start a blog?

It is my opinion that Letterman should apologize for the jokes erroneous implication and the overall distastefulness of the subject.[**] Then Palin should work on her fellow partisans and "so-called" conservative "leaders", be they elected or sponsored in their "free" speech; in particular surrounding the improper use of words like socialism and racism and the irony and empathy of Alaskan ownership of resources. If she could make as good a showing with her "so-called" friends, it would be a service to her party and the nation.

* the original distastefulness was more standard fare for late night yet the error aside, other exaggerations have been made in making this an issue about women.[These two links were found and inserted after I finished this post. But I think there is a general hazzard in communication that transcends humor or could actual be a key ingrediant that is often missed. If one takes the word "slutty" and recognizes it as an adjective and not part of the noun, one might not be so quick to empathize as a victim.] [late read]

[**] to a great extent he has, but I mean acknowledging the error and not unreasonable offense taken by the daughter actually at the game (at least until it was made "hey" of)

[Later 6-15-09 follow-up Letterman Boost and word out that Letterman will re-apologize.]
[6-16-09: Palin accepts apology and evolution.]
[Further RE:Devolution On CBS]

Happy Earth Day!

Huffington Post did not exactly have it easy to find.
This is a jab at those who fall for the fair and balanced.

[Late breaking yesterday: Torture Breaks
Counselor to State: Philip Zelikow
Senater Armed Services Committee torture "reverse engineered".
Senator Carl Levin declassified report
Plausible Progress]
[Today: tortured Republican ]
[4-23-09 update Rant on Big Eddie!

Hang down your head Paul Krugman!

On Meet the Press Jonathan Mann is the bright spot and I do not mean to dis Paul Krugman but the idea that they were talking about owning the economy is my point.
Obama will not own the economy unless...
Oh, heck I fell in the trap.
But hang down your heads, Will and Dowd.

But the time horizon is a factor. It took almost 8 years for the economy to be the issue. It has been over 25 that Reaganomics has been the problem, not to mention, over twice that since FDR and Charlie McCarthyism *have been in the background.
(OH and I will not link Charlie Wilson and another Joe)
BUT THEY ARE THE SHADOWS!
Will is proctor hoc post [*] or we have the Charlie/Joe fallacy.

Re:links Owning the Shadows
and more?
* Socionomics of hope? And the vicious cycle.

[The reference in the title goes no deeper than the reference to a song.(period) (note)...(not) that it is a song of the century but it may be about our economic and cultural heritage...] [or the potential of a carbon based world in a dollar debased economy or justice period.]
[How can you not smile **and be curious Mann?

** Thanks to Jon Stewart and Yes We Can!

[the bottom line? the Greenspan put may need a flip-flop to the Krugman take or is it really about our take>]
[And I thought that would be the last spin but who needs a hair cut and who will*** be the barber?]

*** need segment link to bailout discussion

[*] 8-13-09 link adjusted to correct spelling but still a missing Charly

hmmm?

New Thinking on the Economy
by Dean Baker,
co-Director of the Center for Economic Policy Research (CEPR)

also Beat the Press

[This points to an interesting problem or ROR:
(see labels for explaination)

The government is not getting its money's worth when buying bad assets. Anyone who understands how the economy works and the market works should not wonder. That is how it works. That is the point of buying bad assets, whether one wonders whether it should be done or not. If someone else would buy them the same would apply. The housing bubble* is a similar mechanism within the greater mechanism that is the financial problem.

How the economy works is different than how economics works. The economy is the thing. Economics is an equation. They both need tweaking and can work the way they are designed, but will tweak someone. Unfortunately an equation in economics will work only to the extent that everything (that is needed or wanted) is included in it. The economy works regardless but almost everything is included, except they are tweaking when they do the economics. And speaking of bubbles, they leak.

It might be easier to agree what not to do, than what to do, as long as failure is an option. But failure is not an option; it is a choice. This may seem like lost words, but failure is a potential outcome. And it can no more be simply allowed**, than freedom. Maybe this is Philosophy 701, but the Washington Post is not up to Journalism 201, let alone the economy.]

* housing equals assets except for the financial blowing of the economics.

** meaning failure should be prevented, and freedom promoted(are these not good points to work on?)

[Speaking of link(and equations): the stimulating if not shaky journalism below.(nfry)]

[only glanced at but likely recommended read: and see comments and embedded Krugman. For now: They'll be back.]

[That was Shwartznegger but later Ron Reagan covers similar territory with a guest who earlier slammed the stimulus. That was in December, so it was not the current plan. Which should be called what is: ARARA for Jobs! or just the begining or what is a quick and practical start. But does have a good chart on "Bang for the Buck", which depending on the math(see comments), could make a 1 trillion dollar difference in effectiveness.] [Post comment comment: of course this is as ridiculous a hypothesis as Plato's Republic, but for the sake of dialogue, a totally bipartisan package, could be seen to have potential for zero stimulus, as dollar for dollar is not really a bang.]

LABELS

Labels (II)
Labels (III)
Labels (IV)
Labels (V)
Labels (VI)
Labels (VII)
Labels (VIII)
Labels (IX)
Labels (X)

Triumph of the process (breaking)

Democratic opposition to seating Burris cracks. Failure of context. Saying something and acting on it are two different things. The senate has not seated Burris, while the "whys" are still wavering in the media. Race, politics, and media are undeniable factors; putting them together and forming questions and "Y"s are infinite.
[Definitively ** by Harry Reid: And apparently may "be damned"(Mike Vicara)*]

Bottom line: the senate is following its rules and making sure Illinois is following its rules and no one person is the decider, though many can have their say, and others can twist in the wind.

As for the other twisting senator; which hangs on the process as well.

Minnesota Post: 1-3-09
ABCNews: 1-4-09
Huffington Post (above): 1-5-09
TPM ***: 1-6-09
Time today

The latest?
Coleman sues!MSNBC
Minneaplis Star Tribune
The catch is that duplicate ballots are counted, but the orginals are not. That is the reason they are duplicated, in order to count them(presumably to get the count into a machine)and by every right the orginals are not counted because they cannot be counted. Speaking as one who has been a(legal)counter and duplicator of votes in Washington State.

[* this is what's breaking live on MSNBC: as my own imaginings and search for missing links, the mention of U.S. Senate rules requiring two signatures is yet to be found, meanwhile the process is being tainted by the media incompetence. Hence the reason the rules committe will be looking at this. I could imagine this going to the U.S. Supreme Court, but it would be likely that the process the senate will take will be within their rights. Rules are not laws, but processes, that must submit to the people involved. Out of this fog, my prediction is that the vote by the full senate will rule. The fact that it may be flexible is the matter. i.e. hinges on the idea that Illinois has a space for and the U.S. senate has required two signatures. That the U.S. Senate determines its rules is the rule and voting on it may be another hinge.]

** the link that hinges on my imagination and rulings, meaning what I hung my comments on,[the missing link(*)] while the Mike Vicara note refers to the taint the media insists on painting with their imaginings rather than footwork. OK, they are keeping us on our toes, by stepping on some.

*** "But you shouldn't confuse the fact that the courts should remain open to hear those claims, with the question of whether or not those claims have any merit," Elias said. "And in this case, former Senator Coleman's claims don't have any merit."