Prospective GPS

Campaign for America's Future
Center for American Progress

Bernie Sanders ? (^)*
(^)  CON TEXT / CON SCIENCE ABOUT THE PROCESS!, / Rough Draft or Quick Vent, [ / ] Apples and Oranges and Cherry Picking.

* Historical Destruction (Historical Reconstructionism)
(b.s.) a. T. P. , b. A day to reflect on., c. Obama - Clinton? **

** Ctrl F Goblin or...Saint or um? Kerry?
OW

T. P.

Not Exactly ... Patron Saint of Process.*

i.e. PS Trianglution Process

* 5-18-15
It used to be called the big tent. I relate this to a big table in the age of Share 'n Angle.*

"Now the president is staking his reputation on a trade deal that is increasingly likely to be seen as a joint Obama/GOP initiative. If he succeeds, his legacy may suffer a mortal blow, and his party is likely to pay a terrible political price in years – and elections – to come."

A. It could have the effect of growing the Warren Wing.
B. There are outside of the trade-deal elements of legislation that have been obstructed and need support. Infrastructure, wages, Affordable Care Act, etc.

The problem with his legacy won't hold a candle to the problem with that of congress's.

* earned media translated to churned media
Camelot 3.0?

Spare the ROD

Read of Day ?*

Speaking of Spare...

* OMGOP

M^: A Shot in the Arm?, Neo-Perspectivism

^ 5th dimension : Tails Aside (sc) [ ? ]

OLO?

4-13-15 ?!?  [~]

(fp?) mobius :A.  THE TRUTH APPARENT: A MOBIUS LAP , B. , C.  Too Random... , D. Re:Figure , E. Rough Riders , F. The Undisclosed Bunker Branch of the Government. G. Borrow and Twist- a surfing metaphor? , H. Stuart Smally Anyone? , I. RUNNING WITH RHETORIC .

Close Encounters of the...

what kind ?

BTW:  The QCON label has been little used of L8, I wonder if it too a fork at Hume or...Tan gent.

Bah bah bah bah bah a ram beau.

The Beach Boy sheep(1) and the Dixie Check(*)? 

(1.)  [a.] Mmmm MOW, MOW, [b.] R.S.V.P., c.Red Bull..., [d.] Tin Foil Herman
(*) spell check[!]

3-6-14 un-reads.
M-beds

The Crisis of Mitt-Flop

The Tetra Heed Ron or Run on the bubble state.

See Mitt Flop.
Who knew?
Or did I forget?
[I don't think Mitt is his dad or his grandson's Oldsmobile, should I try Mitt-Mobile.]

Weird Google of the Day.

Who coined "culture war?

A,

B,

C,

D,

E,

James Davison Hunter ?

The Trigger?

The Dickens you say?

[NFRY]

[QCON of the day: Mitt Romney is not finished, obviously. But my point is that the three states he lost and Rick Santorum won, were all caucus states*. That is probably the biggest factor in concentrating the conservative interests, as well as what Romney and Gingrich have done to each other. ]

*2-10-12 not exactly: tet ra he dron ?

Meta World

Peace Out!

The Lost Obama.
[under construction: there is more to the DBA.]

No, this is not a parting shot. But it is a crack or google at DBA.
I really should not make light of crack pots.



"by crack/key" [!]

Hint: Have your scroll on or click on.

[New MO(or no mo']
[Mo bama Slash Oh-ba-ma]

[Index A and B in progress, Oh Ba Ma ? Irons in the fire, without ironies. Not so fast.

My point of this taxing tangent is the GeOhMeTry* of escalation or not sum game.]
A hint is sometimes in the scroll, over.

[Posted today: This is A, B, C and D. Under D and team[!] there is Will Time.]
[The Process?]
* my pinnacle or bubble theory in regards to Politics, Religion, Economics, and Foreign Relations (more specifically, the values dynamics)

Follow-up

And post insert.[Update]

Old Digs: Slate on Health Reform

Case Study:
If his crime is so clear he should be prosecuted, but that is part of the problem. Part of the constitution involves treaties being the law of the land. I did not get into the particulars of his charges but his treatment is possibly a violation as well. If his intent or principle was to be a whistle blower for international crimes, he should have been more select, not that he would not have to face justice just the same. The likely reason he can't face justice is our country can't face justice. So I am saying that even if he thought he had principles he should not have done what he did. And even if he does, he must face trial, but then there is the difficulty of exposing more by allowing him a defense and having to defend the country. So I do not willy nilly and neither do the PsySR expect that there not be standard treatment for traitors,(which it seems has been gone beyond) but if this is it, then that is another exposure and point of my so called Case Study...Justice and American Exceptionalism.

A calling of Blues and Jazz?

Under the QCON this is a ramble of sorts and news. There is a common thread in the contact of the tangent being others only lightly referenced or embedded.

P.S. A particular charge(PC?) that one side makes is that the otherside has not read bills. I posit two concerns. Have they read the bill? Of course it is valid that they do not have the time sometimes. But why not at least mention what they have issue with. This of course this is especially related to the second link in this post. I will not be reading all of these things, but we can sometimes let others be our filters.

[BREAKING: Not to Lampoon*, but up on READING?]
*no pun intended but this just in my INBOX and upon reading makes it back to the P.S.[and just prior...an update]

[There is more than a Ribble run through this, and it is not just Dialogue or Dialectic, nor wordplay intended, but it seams** American Exceptionalism.]
** see Labels

[In a less uniting manner Thom Hartmann comes through again, not that there is anything wrong. But he does correct a name and give some party history.***]

*** Thom has altered his course in regard to pronouncing Boehner's name despite the principle it was founded on, Bane or Democratic Republic. It is interesting that Jefferson and Lincoln are involved in the history of party name changes. BTW: would it be too far fetched to call the No Labels Party, the Platonic Party? It is not really a party, but then it might be the latest niche in the evolution. I came to this in a reflective(read bounce) way. Would it be right to call them The Republic Party?

Classification Warfare

i.e. Tax on Oh me?
A Tea Party Taxonomy. (Newsweek)
(Speaking of classifications, I have been lax on mine.)
[Found within the above article: The Myth of Objectivity
& The New New Newt and found elsewhere (MSNBC) and related leap(political calculus)]

[Further analysis/commentary: guidelines , Christine O'Donnell, cloning].
[Bottom line: Tea Party Express and Freedom Works are both Republican productions.]

[On the other hand...on pragmatic and incremental* ...]
Poor Segue: Bolds fully read con descending into the NFR.
[Team of Rivals: More Machinations.]
* original redundant link replaced with two possibilites(apologies for dupes)

Unprincipled

Right? Not...given credit**.
F-F-F*

* Flip-flop of Font(or fear) ofor Ribble.
** link corrected 8-18-10 and all links finally read
[Context formulated on only a glance and some presumptions, now confirmed.]

Where in the world is Carmen...

Miranda?
Could it be...Real Mythication? Or a mixed fruit salad of bureaucracy.

Labels hint.

We have a heckuva'n updating to do.
[Sea Wall].Oh...really?

Real hint: Sometimes headings have meaning and sometimes they are just links that go deeper. Technical advances in formatting have complicated* literary(communications) styles, while sometimes we are caught in a web.

*not

Note to self:
no Navigation label below
see hint: recycle- ouch!)
[or links in Wall label]

[1-7-10:Shhhh! It is in the Senate Plan! Granted, not "single payer" or "public option" but... "national plans overseen by the same office that manages health coverage for federal employees and members of Congress."]

Who needs brackets?

Maybe a Turn a Meant.
I am not taking the Fifth but there is a sixth line in the countdown. Keith Olbermann recently added a new quick comment format. He is welcome to call it QCON. And weirdly enough I recently tweaked my own labels, not to mention Ribble*.

* my use of labels is inconsistent not to mention following up with the answers to my Ribbles, let alone defining the mixed punderstanding of nuance.
(Riddle: Ribble: Ripple) Now that is spin.

Buy In?

[[UPDATE 12-23-09:
Salon v. Huffington*
Throwing in the towel of bipartisanship and/or getting it together?
Who needs Republicans when the Democrats have two wings?
(On the other hand: High Stakes Poker [**] anyone?)

* Wonk Room actually, but the sentiment counts and change happens. ]]
[**Thanks to Thom Hartmann ]

[Resume original post]
The Senate Hurdle? The Federal Option.
[OurFuture.org]

Optimistic Sense?
Real Mythication
UPDATES
Saving the spot *
Get 'er done
Hiatus of Thought
Rubric's Cube...
[12-22-09: Think Progress Hopenhagen, (FT, WaPo, NYTimes) OurFuture.org Bumbling Economy?]

A fortunate day!

Textbook Crash & Textbook CYA

Was it luck?
Was it fate?
Or was it a higher being?

Or was it preparation,
Was it practice,
Was it community,
Or having a textbook?

Is this only a rhetorical change?

[A day with a heroic landing and a fantasy flight.]
[Clipping the Gipper and the inside clipper]

Great Segue!

After Day 3 of the Democratic National Convention,
my first comments are:
So far, so good!
"No way! No how! No McCain!" Now that is a flip-flop.

Seriously...
From "Faint Praise/Criticism" to Progressive Narratives.
Not to mention pragmatism...

but I would like to note belated congratulations
to Rachel Maddow (nfry*) on getting her new show on MSNBC. Rachel refers to herself as a liberal not a partisan. Righteously so.[*] It is really hard to criticize Rachel, but she is the perfect flip-flop of Pat Buchanan. He is sometimes valid in his criticism of Republicans and praise or suggestions for Democrats, only the better to eat you my dear. Said the wolf to Little Red Riding Hood. While Rachel may be the same for Democrats, only the better for the country.** (Embedded in these asterisks are references to their work. Earlier encounters with Howard Kurtz, long time agitation by Pat Buchanan and recent enthusiasm tempered with caution for Rachel. Let me just say that her liberal enthusiasm and hopes may be cast as negative shadows on the pragmatism needed for progress.*** But criticism of Democrats and our process, taken in the right light, can be good for all.)

*The segue is filled with the likes of Howard Kurtz, and Patrick Buchanan.
** not a perfect flip-flop, the Democrats not the country.
*** it might have helped, yet it might not have, to remember the particular comment that I had a problem with, but it was only a comment on the progress of the convention or one of the speakers that caused me to wonder about her perspective as she makes progress. Had it changed or is it what got her where she is?

[A regressive update, meaning only a thought that I had when Biden was announced: That he should well vet humor and plagiarism. Now that is a well contained line. Of attack, for us, and by us, not necessarily of us. And depending upon McCain's VP a wonder of the Republican vetting process.]
[John McCain: An Experience We Don't Need! Thanks to Thom Hartmann.]{Not to mention: Breaking the Yalta Conspiracy}

[* 9-3-08 Update link]

Quaint Administration

and other concepts.
Talk about evolution:
Meanwhile, Oil prices rebound.
VP Cheney, Editor in Chief
War Powers Obsolete
Free Market Dump
End Panel
Talk about embedded.

Ditto

It works!

As projected.

[I have heard but have not researched and had earlier thought that Project Chaos might just backfire, as an inverse to the 50 state strategy and state and party rights. By this I mean, that I am uncertain of the mechanics and regardless of the impact and dynamics of the competing theories, if any Republicans were cheated out of their ability to vote for Republicans that they could have if they were not gaming the system, it would be hard to imaging that it could happen, but someone probably has. After this convoluted ramble, I think not. It may have backfired in the long run, but not so clearly for the time being.]

[5-17-08: the embedded point here is that the focus on crossover distracted from some races that were in-play, costing the Republicans seats. It could have been the publicity and a get out the vote for Dems, which is my own double-edged theory. Project Chaos and/or Hillary staying in, had a get out the vote effect along with a vaccination for negative campaigning or as one conservative writer called it, "positive polarization". Apparently the Republicans have been spinning since before FDR was put in his grave. No disrespect, but that is that plays into it too well. The "new deal" and the so-called media.

"A flip-flop should be no handicap."

Richard Dawkins points to his own flip-flop on Amotz Zahavi's Handicap Principle [*] and how it fits in with his own theory in The Selfish Gene. The point is not that anyone has a handicap, but that those that do, must be actually more successful to survive or are selected by a mate (or voter) for that reason. However, the traslation from the math to the biology to the sociology has a handicap. The math. Most people will follow a meme whether they follow the math or the meme. Meaning they will follow a leader whether they know the meme or they are just mean. But flip-flopping on a meme, does not mean the results will be progess.

If this has not been followed I will leave it anyway. Politics is not science, science not a religion, and religion is not faith. Faith is another story.[**] But cost is a reality that can't always be calculated and takes more than economists.

[*] last article on link
[**] first article
[also see comments on Richard Dawkins to the left in first link]

BTW: flip-flop is no joke in physics, let alone other fields -- not to mention nuance

[Follow-up: Changing my religion. Roger Bingham (second-to-last article)and The Light Side of Locality (third article). Or Hubris and Humor?]

Ditto Heads Unite!

Thanks to Rush Limbaugh (
[for those that don't know: Ditto Heads are Rush followers]
and FOX )we have a new 50 state strategy.
And it wouldn't be anywhere without Hillary.
[5-15-08: updated ]
The double-edged conspiracy actually works. Rush is not only covering for the "rats leaving the sinking ship" but in trying to get Hillary as the nominee, as the lighter of the two democratic candidates, gives us a more weighty candidate. Meaning do they really think that Hillary is easier to beat or just covering their bases if she wins? And do they really fear Obama as a candidate or do they think he would be the one to beat? In the end, the turnout is Confusionism. Not to be mistaken for confusing but more mama* nature and fusion. Maybe the con has backfired. But in the end there will be more registered voters, if they get counted.

Other sources: Is Limbaugh's Operation Chaos Working?
Anti-Hillary, Anti-Wright Takes Toll

* Confusionism: a more balanced nature than the heirarchy implied

! deluded Republicans (1st link, paragraph 2)