Mmmm MOW, MOW

papa mmmm MOW MOW

Bill is THE Word, for the Pizza Pie Culture.

Michigan [not Madison 9-28-11]
Ohio
Wisconsin

Speaking or Iron Knee you tooboldly surf*.
[Not to mention: Keepin' up with the Jones is, I mean.]
* David Sirota:[bold added] Standing in for Thom Hartmann, I don't have time to disagree, but it is not the second time that sets a precedence, it may be the time it goes to court, in regards to the way Obama follows the "Law" too similar to the way Bush did not.
[AND JUST BREAKING]
Speaking of intersections and bottom lines:

Well, now, now, now. would n't you know it. Let's keep it cool. BUT THIS? Hopefully just a form of education, that will be kept in perspective.

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.

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)

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).

Happy President's Day

by George or state or other.

Washington's Birthday by Fed.



Belly Up to the Bill Boys or Girls.

Somewhere[**] I must locate certain economic links.* The point? Debt is a mis-management issue, indicating that business types have no business running government as a business.(see "certain" six). Two particulars: Wisconsin is not even one of the top 25 states likely to go bankrupt. "Benefits" are not "entitlements", they are owed by contract and negotiated so as bargained away wages. Debt is a red herring that is very fishy.

* this paragraph may suffice but it is "hard work"
[**] just found, and had seen this, but more may follow

The New Compendium

NOT!
Really...probably not.
But it sounds like an epoch
and not quite an anthology,
but hopefully not an achronism.

THE POINT?
A cover page of sorts.
Yeah that's the ticket!
...the dynamics of progress,

Six Things Everybody Knows About Deficits ...
That Are Completely Untrue
Which I rephrase as truths:

1.) Current and future spending are not the problem with the defecit, except for paying for our history.
2.) Social Security is not a big deal to fix(separately), but could be impacted by the budget and other decisions.
3.) Austerity and investment are different stories, that both have an impact on the budget and winning the future as well as the now.
4.) Concessions should not be trickle down but incentives should be target up.
5.) Wall Street is not fixed enough to be that big or permanent a part of the solution.
6.) Social Security is not on the same budget table as Medicare and Medicaid and calling them "entitlements" is misleading, and means testing or tax changes could address their impact on our economy.

[Mis-click of the mouse of the day]
Slash Segue(Aristotellian)[A]
Maybe you had to be there.
The Bill Thing.
The Frackin' Thing.
The Club of Construction.[ B ]
The King Tut of Rhetoric
Not to mention Divagation.

BTW: Going Egypt depends on who you ask, and I am not asking Stephen or Steve King***. And Going Wisconsin should not mean Going Cheesehead*. But I will tie this up with a preamble. If I may paraphrase and extend the remarks of a caller to the Norman Goldman Show: If you are not for "a more perfect Union" you may be Un-American. If you are not willing "to promote the General Welfare" you may be militant against "the Blessings of Liberty", but one can take words (and rhetoric or puns) too far. I suggest the word militant not be used, and that nowwhere near the tactics be used in political protests** but just who expects whom to turn the other cheek? There seems to be a slippery slope in the free speech zone.

* my original intent was a pun on Ed Head, which is not a Soft Head, but then there may be a lede to leader in the eventual link.[I believe it was a caller to the Ed Schultz Show that lead me to independently think that the failure of unions in Wisconsin would put a whole new spin on the name Cheeseheads.]

** the right to protest and any intent to break the law, includes the right to be arrested but not beaten, though we should understand that resistence is not futile but few put up with it well

*** see previous clause "divagation" link and prior line "Tut" for the two Kings.

[A,B updates]
[2-18-11 Blank(updated)Network- Parallel Channel(See The Pair o' Lax View ) Updates under construction. SERIOUSLY these are a serious sorting of views.]

[See Follow Up]

[Note Jumping the Gun Again! i.e breaking in-box of (news) sorts (AKA: sports metaphor not target or weapon analogy) Meaning the CPAC divide regarding the Islamophia section of The Progress Report is hint at the LAME O' PHOBIA of Platonic Dialogue not to mention a cave[of irony] of or con tent... or CAP]

Six-edged Rhetoric.

Not just to continue a theme,(a likely coincidence)
but it involves the dynamics of progress,
and I don't mean the apparently belated addition(see scrollover v. lede).

Six Things Everybody Knows About Deficits ...
That Are Completely Untrue
Which I rephrase as truths:

1.) Current and future spending are not the problem with the defecit, except for paying for our history.

2.) Social Security is not a big deal to fix(separately), but could be impacted by the budget and other decisions.

3.) Austerity and investment are different stories, that both have an impact on the budget and winning the future as well as the now.

4.) Concessions should not be trickle down but incentives should be target up.

5.) Wall Street is not fixed enough to be that big or permanent a part of the solution.

6.) Social Security is not on the same budget table as Medicare and Medicaid and calling them "entitlements" is misleading, and means testing or tax changes [*] could address their impact on our economy.


Note: Said Relief and labels/associations Slash Segue...
criss-cross aside of more Williams
William Harvey
William of Occom

[*] This is not the link but Norman Goldman did refer to LEX of the FT about relative tax rates(or revenues/GDP)(nor is this it, but... )

The Maze of Mace

The previous post regarded more about what is outside the box or Pentagon. I am not sure that the 10 essays will get through the other monkeys of the budget and media maze.

BTW: I guess I was lucky finding a maze that led to a pentagon of sorts. By this I mean the previous link and the reference to the terms used in conversation and budgets from "war machine", military, defense, security, foreign policy, monetary policy, to bubbles. There! I hit seven monkeys off our back(off the wall) and on the table.

Fair and Balanced...

Math and English A mace 'n maze.
The Pentagon Labyrinth
Legends of the Round Robin.
Robin' the Hood to balance Peter, Paul and Hail Mary.


ENOUGH! Defense, Military, Security and the "War Machine" are not even the same thing, let alone the same pocket, but they all do matter.
Chamber of Poe: quoth the legion.

[2-15-11 Related Comment on Journalism : Michael Lind makes some very good points about the likes of the Right not deserving as much attention, Rachel Maddow tries to make up for that with Senator McKaskill, but Lawrence O'Donnell illuminates the problem of having reasonable journalistic approaches. On the other hand, Sarah Palin is right that the President is responsible for telling America more, not that some understand the process of getting things on the table. ]
[Also on The Ed Show: Representative Bane Or, not ledership! I would like to defend Dick Cheney though, as I believe that the boos were for the heckler not the former V.P. If Republicans don't want to talk about the Reagan debt, then Obama can leave it off the budget table for them.]

The Answering Machine...

message to the 3AM wake up call.
OBAMA AND FREEDOM

Bridging the English Channel

or Driftin' D'Nile, and the Club of Association.

Note the metaphor of Ge Oh Me Try?
Other dimentionalism to follow.

THREE CHEERS TO THE NEW NORM?

Breaking or

Peripatetic Justice and Ledership let alone
an achronism ?

This is a ramble on the Wave, aka the 4th Estate as well as a hint for a Ribble. No pun on Reliable Sources but I could have more reliable spelling but not an achronism.

I won't mess with the mutliple bottom lines* but it is about change and finding a silver lining. Changing my procedures will be job one, but as for this content note the bold italics. This is a preemptive note, before I take the time to more fully process the SOTU.

Foot note: fourwords for the two word culture - bane or con text

* last links added: period/pause

[Woof! Ratings are now in for the SOTU, and here are two ecumenical references. Rachel Maddow, a "prayer for the free-market" from as Joe Scarborough put it "the Cardinal". Who let the CEO's out! Speaking of "genre" note the connection to CNN.]

Nadir

or Bane or...

Enhanced State of the Union,
Republican Response,
and the Third Way?**

With minimum of rhetoric I have filtered of sorts. Boy, was it hard work! Googling* is not easy. I tried to find "fair and balanced" sources, but these
were the ones I chose to settle on. There is more than irony in the way the searches worked, or is there? Some might call it a conspiracy. But others might wish for a 4th dimension.

* or any search engine depending on the words chosen
(and original intent) as original viewing was CNN but sometimes it is not just me.

** 1-26-11

[1-26-11 Woof! Ratings are now in for the SOTU, and here are two ecumenical references. Rachel Maddow, a "prayer for the free-market" from as Joe Scarborough put it "the Cardinal". Who let the CEO's out! Speaking of "genre" note the connection to CNN. My bad, I can't located any embedded references in by blog to a recent Republican Debate sponsored by CNN, but it may be there somewhere. But this does link to the question of the genre of the networks.]

The Challenge?

A legend for the Road map.[**]
[1-26-11 Update Dated below]

Are we there yet?
Pit Stops or Rest Stops?
Don't just spin our wheels.
Not that the squeaky wheel doesn't...
locating progressive perspectives may be in need of a key.

[Walking the line...w/Sam Stein, a tangent of empathy or introspection or straddling it with w/Paul Krugman, or neo-alterior line?*]

* there is some cognitive dissonance in this; America as a business, the private FED, and not just to pun on read or black [updated]

[** 1-25-11 Not exactly a huge effort to find the Republican Health care plan [Plan] but... here is more of a reply all, to the challenge, thanks to Rachel Maddow.]
[Not exactly up to the challenge above, nor exactly pro-rated, but still pre-speech... the challenge was the sources and keys to them, and it seems the media is not really up to the challenge or it takes more hard work. However, part of the challenge is the political nature of the media itself***. While attention has been given to a third so-called party within a party as a reply to the State of the Union, where is the so called Left? The Republicans have divided themselves to conquer so to speak, is there a voice let alone plan from the left in there, other than the pundits of lean forward? Or is Obama the Middle Bear's porridge? Just right.]

*** follow-upHowever: a turn spike.

[1-26-11 UPDATE: but just a hunch, as I pause the video, as the applause is still rolling, as the President enters the chamber, in the Welcome to the Enhanced State of the Union, the point is immediate: Winning The Future. Competition and Foreign Policy will not be foreign to Coordination.]

WWOS

"What would Olbermann say?" Thank you, Stephanie Miller.
"Tone matters", thank you Vice President Biden.
Influencing it...priceless.
Not to be ironic...
Thank you Steve Weber for the "introspection"
and "reflect(ing) the difference" Mitch Bard and the "globalgrind" of Russell Simmons not to mention coco who? And even David Schuster and back to Steph...anopolis*.
[Note: Bookending Bold Read. Meaning I may have only glanced at some the rest but will update the font later.]
* I'll let the spelling stand(although the name is Stephanopoulos) in a nod to the poison Ivy of the FOX league.

How can one make light of a tragedy?

By looking for a silver lining. I think that is what we all want to do. We just have different perspectives on what preemptive is. But remember the silver lining requires a cloud and a light and it is always darkest before the dawn.(Not.)

My original trigger for this thought was a satire on the recent Seahawks loss in Chicago. But please note that my weapon of choice is words and I often have too full a tool box and grab the wrong instrument. But there is a difference between a target and a gun sight and I am sure that they meant surveyors or navigational equipment. Then there is the questionable use of a muzzle.

Back to Seattle: I feel I cost the Seahawks the game by not wearing my cap till the third quarter or so. But then maybe it was in the cards, or the hand of Chicago that was dealt. If these three downs aren't enough then Plato is a hail Mary and there is nothing wrong with the school of hard knocks.

Who let the dogs out? Not Pavlov.

[As for questionable sources: here are some earliest comment.
And more recent.]
[Speaking of rhetorical change*... what about repeal of the Dole-Romney Healthy Deficit Reduction Act, aka Obamacare.]
*see recent link 29:20 and 38:20.

A picture's worth 1000 words?

[Italics: Edited next day.]What are actions?
These are rhetorical question(s). Ones which are only the beginning of the dialogue, not that I will extend or finish it. But in relation to the issue of rhetoric and politics and the meaning of words, it might be kept in mind, that if it is so,[**] then what does a symbol or icon say that the politician can't for whatever reason say? And in many cases the participants and our freedoms, in relation to the dialogue and the media only confound this rhetoric or meaning as to the various positions of responsibility or fields of endeavor(arts if you will) they cover.

[AND...How many words is a link worth? Let alone a leap*? I say this in regards to the hopeful turning point, in regards to this walk-back. Not that I have anything to walk back, but in context to consideration of a possible change in regards to the aforementioned arts.]

* let alone a name: Tucker? But actually my intent was to note: "the value of the unexpressed thought" under "mixing it up."[see second video: Mediaite]
[Main context? Irony of what counts.]

[And I don't mean to find reason in everything, but the words and intent embedded (and parsed and paraphrased)here are for all our consideration.]

[**] the pictures worth
[1-12-11 In relation to edited above: President Obama has been accused of using violent language in regards to, in a knife fight bringing a gun. It was a metaphor. We are not in knife fights. It is even a poor metaphor. But when that causes their opponent to use stronger language, that tie in issues, misplace facts and use imagages. Then they are responsible for even worse metaphor. That does not mean it will be easy to change things. Using the original to make matters worse, is oddly justified, but only by way of extending the metaphor and being claimed victim of it and feeling their freedoms threatened. Some people apparently can't handle extending metaphors, and they are not even always meant to be extended. But again it seems that by extending them, they intend to break the original metaphor, for the battle of our ideas.]

Or ask for a third

opinion.
Buck Up!
Why aren't we still evolving? Because why would monkeys become human when some are making monkeys out of humans? And others are nostalgic for cavemen if not devolving. And a satirist expecting gravitas?
[link references in order:
Josh Marshall-Joan Walsh(TPM/Salon)Buck Up.,
Eugene Robinson-Chalse Mahtesian(WaPo/Politico)Dem Ads.,
Chris & P.J. O'Rourke-Satire Evolving?,
J.C. Watts-Brendan Steinhouser(Former Rep. Rep./Freedom Works)Republican-Tea Party.,
Chris Mathews-Drive the Freakin' Car!,
Satirist-Get out the Freakin' Vote!]

On the One...

hand, on the other...
then there's the market.

Not to be glib...

but I think the honeymoon may really be over. Yes, the Irony. And oh, the preemption.