More than zFacts.

Depth Charts *.
More ** comment and context later.

(s.o.l. #318*)

(s.o.l. #450*)

(s.o.l. #450* embedded )

*Scroll over links to reference charts.

[format explanation: charts not in order of links]

** more than zParty or z-Politics

"you people..."?

Skirting the dignity. 

Ann Romney claims it is below* the dignity of the President for his campaign to follow the money. 
"beneath his dignity..."!?!?
We can't get beneath your dignity !
You can't handle the dignity.
Show me the dignity...
not the face of the down troddin'!

Know the difference between cause and affect, between foundational and founding, between digging and building.

[Lean Forward]
[MB Jonathan Capeheart Romney editing, which I would call Rumsfeldian die-a-log.]

[Hardball: Braking bad? "Bachmann-Beck Overdrive."   "It's not about the ad...": Flackery on Flackery.]

Enough puns on why they break their English.  It seems that the Romney's(or Republican's) cannot afford be honest about how the economy works, let alone the immigration and emmigration of their beliefs**.

* more awkward English?

** "trickle down anyone"?

Etch-A-Sketch 2.0

Or is that redundant? 
Original intent* was Enough Smirking 2.0.
*or 3.0?[Or admiration for nuance]
[Anyway, choice of language was why I was reticent to continue the references to Smirking or Sketches.  I mean when does the Etch-A-Sketch stop?  I guess it is the nature of campaigns, like a Glenn Beck chalk talk.]
[Speaking of sourcing:

“Unless things change and Obama can run on accomplishments, he will have to kill Romney,” said a prominent Democratic strategist aligned with the White House. 

Needless to say this is disgusting and should be disavowed by the campaign.  However the full context just may be important, not that we have it !  Oar have we?] 



**Nature that [!]



[Hint: There is a Mitt of a geometricks re:sourcing. 
Or Platonic Multiplicity. Yeah, that's the ticket!
Vu due the math.]

[Hint 2.0?  The shortest distance between two points is a punchline. Ouch, not my point, but maybe Romney's straightline.  It's geometry, politics and the table.  Is Raw Money hiding behind Little Red Riding Hood?  Or vaccinating attacks strategy?***]

QED ?
*** Foot N. O. T.?
[TBA: PAGES and De-Baits! i.e.(Note to self) Obama v. Romney recent speeches.  JOBS/SCOTUS]
[It's not just me ? (7-6-12) Not Exactly !  The  Para-Gone Seg way ?  More later. ]

Follow...up or Down.

Follow-Up or down?
The voodoo that some do do.
Including 9-11 and a horse of course, about the rule* of law?

DR-Deficit Reduction
NOW-"It's Complicated."

* not to pun on run down, but Thomas Roberts Rules,
[water gate ? B S: Uphold or Holdup?]

[ MSNBCTV is Thomas Roberts: live rule yesterday Jansing &Co Re:action swing flop De:volve Thomas Roberts ! ]
[Huff Times, AM**, Salon. NG v GN]
**Ruth Marcus: Obama Legacy? Re-do?

[ Politics Revisited / R M ? ! NewsNation M M. Jobs / Freedom ?]
[OK, the above line is as boggled as anything, but it is about the nature of the process and reality or the politics and die manics(to parse the dynamics or how of the beef) which is still spinning on The Cycle.  The Supreme Court is not a dictionary.  Justice Roberts reportedly did not say it was tax.  But Republicans need to see things black and white or they can't uphold their politics of holdup.***]

[Fee Fi Foe FUMM? MB on Mitt the Mandatious(ChamberMade). Fear and uh...
MR
RM.. uh, Martin Bashir pre-CP.  Mitt the Moderate? ]

*** Again, sorry for getting caught up in the pun and parsing of politics. It comes down to one word: running.  Running the government or running for office.  Another word: table.  Oops.  What is on the table?  Do we want them running the table?  Obama ran to put it all on the table and Republicans want to run the table.

Democracy Upheld! (5-4) (R/x)**

Not to spike the ball. 
Mandate will become a tax!

Well... that was my idea or interpretation of the bill, but that was FOX News' claim.
But my original ball that might have been a spike was "Democrats Upheld" but Obamacare or the Affordable Care Act, is a bi-partisan bill, so I cannot claim a victory for Democrats.  It is a victory for congress and the political progress.  It is a victory for Obama and bi-partisanship.  Not that victory is a Burger King*, or having it my way.  I should admit that recently I thought that part of the ruling would be kicking the can down the road, since some of the provisions don't go into effect till 2014. 
Oops, in plain English, I may have been right about the can.
Senator Dan Coates on Jansing&Co. claimed lack of bi-partisanship.  That claim is a victory for politics and bi-partisanship.  The ACA was passed under reconciliation.  It was not a Democratic bill, but a democratic bill.  If the President can be blamed(see choice/bold-underlined) for congress not getting things done, when the Republicans obstruct with filibusters.  Republicans cannot have all the changes they could get and not take credit for them by voting against the bill to claim partisanship by not being able to filibuster. 
If anything this is a vaccine to the insanity of the partisan Issa Committee which doctor for the NRA. 
Pump it up! Obama Cares !  Chris Matthews has a very interesting Stupid Conspiracy.  On the other hand, I thought that the obvious was missing in the court arguments.  I think that means that it was plain that a loss of tax break is not a penalty, or is it the semantics of taxes.

* whose weigh or beef?
** still looking for the bullet ratio aka up 'n over or held/turned [People/$]
[of and for the people, over money]
[The real in'f-fable might be taxes/commerce. The High Five ?  4GETIT?
It is a win for Politics, Bi-Partisanship, Obama, and the Economy!  But according to Raw Money?  "A Choice"... between Government standing between you and big corporations or big corporations standing between you and your health care.(Bold over underlined ? )]
Not to strike a punchline, but bottomline:  Obama is Bush! A Political Capitalist!
Romney is Kerry!  A nuanced flip-flopper.  But only in the light of...(the president speaks)***

(asterisked anachronism888baneORspeaks.)

***  TBA
[Coff E T A B L E ]
[AM H&H game change? Tweet Morning Joe! ET? MR doc RM RL btw: NFIB v. SSHH$ ]
[PC v MF ! (?)]

(photo credit)

[Hi5-4th'tableCongressISjobWON!]
[Congress is open to a peel!]

[I don't have the rest of the story to back this up, but I think that Norman Goldman analyzes NFIB v. SSHHS the way I have.  Not only that but Justice Thomas or the D$ent may have bust the fallacy that health care is commerce.  Not only that but I think that Justice Roberts figured out how it can work or not work depending on congress, as I think that congress could have if they had more cooperation rather than partisanship.  NorMan really cut through it with a caller, regarding small business and Mitt RobbedMe.  How do you know when Mitt is telling a lie?  He is either talking about Obama or economics, if not both at the same time. Just between me and we, it seems that without fully reading the Affordable Care Act or the full decision, the Supreme Court seems to have understood it better than it was argued, but not much more than I thought it was.  The catch is that we are patching together various interpretations that make a decision that still takes some tweaking by congress.  It puts taxes and states at the table.  The catch seems to hinge on the powers of congress and the definition of commerce.  As Chris Matthews was want to call it a Stupid Conspiracy, I may lean toward calling it a Swift Strategy, despite the games some play with acronyms, initialism or caricatures.]
NG
GN
UP v UC
Unprecedent President vis a vis Unprecedented Congress.
Now that is PC! Due(or vu doo) the Math!
(Bush/Obama x Obstructive/Health Care)
[I would like to thank three people for helping me understand GeOhMeTry[!] Randi Rhodes, Lawrence O'Donnel and Michael [links 6-29] Moore... Well...there are host of others but in particular RR and LO, have brilliant insight if not intel.  Randi a quick take on Obama, Lawrence an understanding of the political process, and MM a way with the message and the medium.  MR-RM.
Plausible Deniability/Plausible Incompetence/ Deniable Competence. That is the voodoo some do.
[Upheld -  U p h e l d !]

Enough Smirking!

The Sport of Stairs!
Well
 ... a bit of a Tan gent. 
Not [!]

[This is a bit of a Mitt-Flop from a long story short.  But you learn something everyday.  In my case it is very embarassing, having constucted a home, that yes it is proper to use a stair for a step, as long as you don't trip.  Not to mention where I may have gone if I had had more sports.  But if it is not too late, don't miss the Stairs link.  It covers one of several topics covered at a weekend get together with friends.  Taxes that is.  Not to mention dressage*.  Little did I know that I actually know someone who participates in that sport.]  

* well not in the same link, don't forget the sport.

6-25-12 ["a" / "gent" brackets the meta 4, not to mention hard ware or punchline.]


Not my original intent [!][?][?]

[But certainly part of the puzzle, is immigration and citizens united and who cares!  Nail?  Emigration is as important as immigration, no new taxes does not mean old taxes aren't fine and public option is not a man date or woe man.]
[RM Nix On MR /on M B]
[I of Needle ? ...  One legged** coffee table! "Papers Please Ruling." Take 3/4?]

** This originated in a pun on Brewer and the SCOTUS in their two rulings today. Three of the four key ingredients of 1070 were over-turned and the only one standing duplicates federal law.  So basically it was overturned and leaves the state with existing law.  In the Citizens United/Montana ruling federal law was upheld as well, or rather state law was over-turned as well.  To keep this from getting messy, I will simply insert a few Ed Schultz links.

6-26-12 Robert Reich on the same page. 
LA Times "reality check".
G P S Cross Rhodes ?
Nav Grid ? / Ambiguous De- sign. (ouch ?)
[Ambiguous Muddle: Andrea Mitchell*** NoPR]

*** Ctrl F "inconvenient" "follow-up" of No Labels BS
Hell***N?

AM AG Definition Gap! Atlantic Pacific / Oceans Don't Protect Us.
[Issa attacks Obama Weakness: C-NewsNation (not looking back @ B*S*)
Hunch Left on the Table. "Court of Public Opinion" Bin/go!
Cause Ma*l Oh Ge!]
[Note: last four uses of asterisks are simply place holders, as in the last case for "u" or "l" or even no place holder. Not to mention !  Spin Cycle ?
Alternate Legs ?]
[Newt Romney Business Man (Green Economy)(Read Levi a thon)?]
[Victory VictiMothy: '68 yada yada]

Choice v. Referendum

The choice is between looking back or going back.  Between Obama's turnaround and Raw Money's turnaround.   The economy has turned around and Obama can claim his second term.  The economy may turnaround* either way, but it does depend on actions and even inactions, not just words.  Ravi Batra predicts a double dip before the November election but also a recovery next administration.  So talk may be cheap, but it does depend on who you listen to***, and who we follow.

* Ravi Batra(2:06) on Thom Hartmann (also see 2:00 news of 3 hr show)

6-18-12 Mitt Romney health care comments ?
Not to make it a referendum on(awkward segue/lost line**) Obamacares v. Romneycare.
Choice is Greek to too many.

** only partial rethread, with awkwardness regarding the choice/referendum irony, not related to the eventual links here.

*** 6-19-12  Not FOX! Not Really!
A horse is a horse of course of course unless you're a Plato or Romney of course.

6-20-12 Re: De-funding?
"Sad day" for dribble [!]
What's the dribble? Not to be ironic. It's politics on the table, in regard to contempt of process.

6-21-12  The dribble ?
Politics Nation "Fast and Furious" [N BA: not to ribble]
Awkward Segue: **2
Bread and circuses*2 to a whole new level. Duoh!
Now there's the rub.

*2 Unless you're Mr. Ed!
**2 This line was insert after getting to the rub, not to mention the bread line or leveled links.  

Contempt for Courage

President Obama is taking Congress(**B) and* Romney on head-on. 

Republicans are all about the politics of opposition.  Democrats are all about the politics of getting things done.(*B)  But there are limits, and they are in the constitution and the three branches of government.  Now that is not a very satisfying thing.  Congress makes the laws, and the president must follow them, and they will not change until they are broken.  Republicans will take the country down while the president has all the tools at his disposal to make sure they don't succeed.  Of course it is under the guise of a disagreement, but is a disguise that the people must see through. 

A look back** is called for because that is where not keeping the change will take us.  Has there not been enough change?  Well just asking the question reminds me of the last administrations Secretary of Defense and his questioning and answering*** himself.   I really don't want to go there.

But the recent Fed mention of the loss of wealth in the last 20 years, parallels the dine and dash that has been a Republican solution that has not been removed from the table.  Democrats have fought wars and built the middle-class, while Republicans have cut checks and unbalanced the nation.

Is the President doing as much as some would like?  As it becomes more clear that Republicans will not, now is the time that he must.

[Hardball "Two Americas" Walsh / Feerey - Romney is not on the ballot?  The Act Act.]

* 6-16-12  link moved back one word(bold added)(Also [Hardball] links)
("Romney" to "and")
** Ctrl F "bite"
*** Ctrl F "Rumsfeld"
(*B) Go jump in the Lakoff(i.e. Ctrl F Lakoff)(oops)
(**B) two links added @"taking Congress"& @Romney reinsert new link
(***B) NFRY & vice verse us (or chicken or egg*c)

[UP w/ Chris Hayes(***B) Stand Your Ground and De-Policing.]
Hint: v.c.(not very crispy)
*c literally

Romney Mumbles Economy

"It's coming back."  Cincinatti
verse us
Obama turns it around...in Cleveland.

[Comments filed yesterday:  Norman Goldman  President had congress**?  Mitt Robney,
If it is possible to be wrong in two dimensions, Raw Money might be able.  At least he is wrong twice in one claim in regards to Obama and the economic turn around.  But while two wrongs don’t make a right. Two rights do make a turn around, but not two lefts.  Well it is a matter of degrees.  (‘scuse me Mitt RobbedMe*) 

Anyway, back to the two wrongs, A.) the President can’t turn the economy around, congress passes all legislation.  B.) the economy has turned around.  C.) turning it around again will be the wrong direction.  D.) There is plenty of turn left.

There is plenty of dispute about how and how much to turn.  There is even plenty of dispute as to how much it was turned.  But there is no disputing that the economy has been turned around and it is still being turned.]

As for "Talk is cheap"? ** Just ask Wisconsin and the V.A., not to mention the middle-class and home equity.  Bubble-up is more economical than trickle-down.   

* Wed. & Thurs. openings
** not frackin' really

[Of course it was mumbled(aka nuanced), it was anachronistic, dependent on looking back.]
http://www.electmitt2012.org/ Quote: "Mitt Romney is focused on implementing a set of conservative principles to reinforce the America we once knew."

Mitt might just be me, but I find it hard to find the Cincinnati speech in full text or video.
Romney Pac Charlie Brown ads running on or from Congressional Budget acts.  Choice or Referendum?  Compare or Retreat.
Martin Bashir
Lawrence O'Donnell

Tony Baloney

Awaiting remarks by the President** on Jansing & Co.* it is not exacty sauce age making. 
Appropriate follow up.
Job  / Race .

NOW with... doom and gloom.  If Romney wants to turn the country around, he doesn't get economics, private, public, or change.  Keep the change!  The Mitt-flop of stay the course of goose and gander.

* Tag Team
** White House

Simon says...

Going Off Script* ?**
Material dialogue.***

* Jansing & Co. : Gov. Rendell(**) nails it!
(links to be added)
** Ctrl F "Speaking of PEG'd" line of links(4)
*** Redrawing Battle Lines (Pelosi letter.)

[There is no script, there is only politics.  The job and the race.]
[related(?): not fully viewed posturing? hard work!]

6-8-12 TONEY BALONEY?
[ANACHRO-SEGUE: Scott Walker the Anti-Palin in terms of terms. Wisconsin is the Republican's Egypt.  Raw Money(*) is America's Syria. The battle field is the point. Clinton and frank oh files of ge-oh-me-try.  Neo-Pythagorean. Not exactly sauce age making. Nor pate cake.

(*) Romney
(**) oops  (not there yet)

Bring It On!

Speaking of preemptive...it was only a thought.  But one missed by this author who takes President Obama to task in The End of the Post-9/11 World.  That being, with the obstructionism (update 6-4) the Republicans bring to the economy, what could they bring to national defense or foreign policy?  Actually the missing thought is the NDAA and how hard it is to change laws given the success he had on Gitmo and his budget and jobs act, and it seems the author missed it too. The only question should be who will be in the legislature to change our laws, and who will be the executive until they do. 

IT IS ON....
the table.

[ Speaking of "speaking of"... hanging* in the balance. ]

* in his own words(WH?)

[Speaking of War on Characterizations.(NewsNation) Deval Bane.]

[UPDATE on forks ?  ? ? ]

[Speaking of share 'n angle, Martin Bashir w/Alter 'n Christie on two Americas.

If Bain=Solyndra then Edwards=Wisconsin.  Not! DR out.(Not to mention Pap on Thom Hartmann.)

Don't Ask, Don't Tell, MRS W. Woe Wae! War Against Ethics.]

[6-1-12 Long Story Short? Du'oh!(?)!]

6-3-12  Calm Post Or Tan Gent ?

Punch Line !

6-4-12 Related Carbon Cycle ?

[Hanging Update ! Not to mention S**B C ?]

**acronym anomoly (for pun sake)

(crossing threshold not sterling qualification)

[Two Bills against the Mitt-L?]

The History of B.S.

[Herstory and Blog Searches* aside.]
[Originally Drafted May 26, 2012]
There is a joke about what the oldest profession is, but I won’t go there.  It is more or less about procreation. The B. S. I am talking about is the flip-flop of Simpson-Bowles.[1] Yes, I believe that was its name before it hit the road.  It was supposed to be a bi-partisan committee on the debt, but could not come up with any consensus on how it should be addressed, so its full report was submitted more like a Supreme Court decision that was tied. 

Recently it seems that its name was changed, to Bowles-Simpson.[2]  Was there some reason for that?  Could it be to honor the real oldest profession?  And I don’t mean the Barter System.  If this is too nuanced, maybe it is the joke, to be less about creation, more about pro$e.  Either way this is a very economic and political history. 

[More Bio-Product.]***
Speaking of PEG’d...(Private Equity Government)[3] or nailed it, Coffee Table This! [4-7] Now that is creationism.

[Now I realize that some boots may be needed for the above, but I was trying to be economic. But the point is that it is always political and it has not been bi-partisan except on the Democratic side.  Pun on BP aside.** The irony is that it is about walking a plank.  Both want a rising tide, but the Republicans want the people to walk the plank, while politicians take one to the other party boat. Unfortunately this may need deeper boots or Mitt-Flops for the economics, let alone politics.   The B.S. may be in this writing, but it is in the links and balanced solutions as well.]

*literally I will present this without links(see footnotes later)
** bi-partisan (now that is slick)
*** oops:  sorry for anachronisms

$tar Buck$

De Calf THIS!
(with these)
No  $hit ! ?


No foot note on way to irony.
Or ribble?

P.S. No Oh"F"Fence!

Budget Bandits?

Thanks to YouTube I became aware of the Budget Bandits in an ad by Ending Spending Inc.
Speaking of Strings and Leaps or Knot.

Yesterday President Obama evolved his personal position on marriage equality.
[Speaking ***^ of Flip Flop? QED! 
And I don't mean cue Ed, nor buy George or Bill-E-Club !
But D E^^ Vo ! ?]


On Monday I tied the knot of sorts.
[Not such a large leap?!] Knot! Really it is.


The above YouTube is Thom Hartmann* discussing President Obama's position with a caller.
[update of sorts][That's Rich!]
It is more than ironic that there is such a string related** ad associated with his YouTube.

* first link is segment of this link
** speaking of debt
*** originally asterisked here

.

[Martin Bashir ... digs in!]

[Bingo: Republicans oppose state's rights!]

[Tic Tac Toe!]@

@speaking of game changer

5-11-12 for later ?

5-15-12 Update.