[@ second google]
First (b.s.)
That's the ticket.
Not to keep it under my hat, but it all started in The Atlantic(!)
Don't take it Parsenal[!](?)
(FN#): a. Dichotomy
of sorts., b. Proxymoron?
, c. What,
Me Worry?
[!] a. Parson
Perspective
(?) The Take Away? - Commander-in-Chief
Obama - Irony
versus Hypocrisy
An aside. War on Semantics?
The Nexus: Neo-Context
[Try-Lateral O-mission?]
But speaking of jobs... - filibuster-is - Neo-Context [!]
Re: F(j)ord Blossom:
BlogSpot
Has A New "Blogger"
escapement?
Middle
C?
Showing posts with label Michael J. Sandel. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Michael J. Sandel. Show all posts
Tuesday, October 28, 2014
Friday, October 25, 2013
FYI / CSI
Cultural Science Illustrated?
Who R you to edit a party?
(by extention or extrapolation ?)
F P 1
(Original Intent: to note sparseness of posts, while tangents/links* are tipping points or (Out Liars)TP. )
*demarcation pre/post-read(or rather viewed) links
[Hint: on voting alternatives**]
** ponder hint links last and scroll over before reading them
OW[!] ?
[It is that time of year. I urge everyone to vote. Who is to say who knows better.]
Wednesday, April 04, 2012
Proxymoron?
Romney/Ryan* - "Social Darwinism"
Make no mistake, I am not associating President Obama with Proxymoron for using "Social Darwinism" wrong. I am not using Social Darwinism as it is commonly** used, since it evolves.
** "common sense is not so common"
Related proxy-aphorism? Counter-Rush or Tea Party or FOX Think.
*** If corporations have become persons, what is society?
Further sources of comment on this event.
The White House (the event: AP Luncheon)
[I Ron Knee of the Bottom Line? That I have yet to listen to the full speech.]
(Footnote: last link entered simul-speech about 14:40 on. Mitt Maligns Marvelous!)
[Loopholes? The Mitt Medvedev Moment. By George. Apologies for the tongue in cheek or cubism on the side but please Ctrl F "Loopholes"under the bold MMM.]
[Other Message Mean 'm, or Forum or 40m mark in video? Check that, 38 minutes, first question, not to mention BS remark. Grand Slam ? Or B in GO!]
[Speaking of GPS: "What we have here" is a Galley Project SimpBowlized, by the deficit commission and the Kitchen/Boat math, marvelous mangling and tale gating. (Also see 2 comments.)]
[P.S. under a Google of "AP Luncheon" I found this interesting Hoist by his own Picard by John Hull. A careful reading and reference to sources would indicate a hoist of his own profession not to mention his metaphorical name. My father had a boat made by Swiftsure. Three flushes you're out! The three strikes are A. the fact-check error. B. the Lockner v. New York error C. the Wickard v. Filburn error. In context: Obama is a "professor", Lockner v. New York was probably what Obama was referring to or in era in general, which John Hull flushes, and Wickard v. Filburn recognized the power of the federal government to regulate economic activity. I mean, the gizzard of that guy.]
8-16-12
P.S. (Pre-Selection: Romney/Ryan 2012)
8-16-12
P.S. (Pre-Selection: Romney/Ryan 2012)
Friday, January 14, 2005
Neo-Context
SUGGESTED READING:
The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order, by Samuel P. Huntington. The most important foreign policy paradigm since the cold war model. In a few words, To be or not to be the west versus the rest.
Democracy's Discontent: America In Search Of A Public Philosophy, by Michael J. Sandel. A look at the flaw in liberal traditions, or on being "a uniter not a divider". A discussion of the history of our "rights" while noting an obligation of solidarity. i.e. Some of "us" must be united against "them".
These are two books which I read several months ago and likely noted in earlier posts. My comments here may be seen as the shortest of summaries as well as a helpful reference to the theme of most of this blog. If we have a clash of civilizations, it should not mean war but a competition of civilizations, and if we have an obligation of solidarity, should it not be to the planet and humanity?
The link below which I only scanned seems to come to the same conclusion as I, that the latter book, is based on a "fallacy of the false dilemma". It nonetheless provides “an extremely valuable history of the political thought of America’s intellectual elites from the Founding to the present“. And I might needlessly add, both sides have them.
The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order, by Samuel P. Huntington. The most important foreign policy paradigm since the cold war model. In a few words, To be or not to be the west versus the rest.
Democracy's Discontent: America In Search Of A Public Philosophy, by Michael J. Sandel. A look at the flaw in liberal traditions, or on being "a uniter not a divider". A discussion of the history of our "rights" while noting an obligation of solidarity. i.e. Some of "us" must be united against "them".
These are two books which I read several months ago and likely noted in earlier posts. My comments here may be seen as the shortest of summaries as well as a helpful reference to the theme of most of this blog. If we have a clash of civilizations, it should not mean war but a competition of civilizations, and if we have an obligation of solidarity, should it not be to the planet and humanity?
The link below which I only scanned seems to come to the same conclusion as I, that the latter book, is based on a "fallacy of the false dilemma". It nonetheless provides “an extremely valuable history of the political thought of America’s intellectual elites from the Founding to the present“. And I might needlessly add, both sides have them.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)