Oliver Uncumber Bash?

This is discuss`ding.  But what the frack 'n bleep do I know? 
Spoiler Alert:  Culturally Radical Journalism--  If you are offended by fowl references spare yourself the irritation[!]  View at the risk of your own democracy.

Other BS? 
RSN: Glenn Greenwald
Slate: Jack Shafer

Anticipation Project ^

Or Atlantic/Pacific ?
RIP*, or prophetic affect ? 

(~)
Actually I have pretty much already bookended or bracked this text with notes and hyperlinks.  My original inspiration was in the field of geometric religion or practices.  The source is a project in The Atlantic(1) and further deconstruction involved that magazine as well. 

(~)CAUTION:  AS UN- EMBEDDED TO BE KANTINUED [!]

Now for the prospectin' ofor conceptions?  Or mining from the lede(or ship):
"The Islamic State is no mere collection of psychopaths. It is a religious group with carefully considered beliefs, among them that it is a key agent of the coming apocalypse. Here’s what that means for its strategy—and for how to stop it."

Now may be just the right time to stop
or wind down my own parsing or~religions~key~apocalypse.* 

(~)R,R,R~[!]

* Anachronistic Reasoning?
^ work in progress(2)[!]
(2) ring E dingy~N.

(~): Scroll Click?

* un circular file ?

Stet 'n Island

Stake House ?*

[Not to be confused with snake house]
* need 2 upd8 link re:m-B'ed  'n ^apophasized chair.
^ net work
(FP!)

^^
Andrea Mitchell
NewsNation ^^
[Technical difficulties @^^2]

Dichotomy of sorts.

Is the Bully Pulpit dead?

The day the right lost the economic argument.

Of Sorts ?

It is not that there is an actual dichotomy.  There are branches for some and wack-a-moles for others.

Hume or ?

Good News Bad News

Not to reference a joke or peripheral* vision.

* The enlightened gift.
(FP1)

[On the other hand (dot)(dot)dot. . .***]







Nassim Nicholas Taleb **

** a caveat ?
*** inconvenient dub-you-beds. Also Note: Major Segweigh





Taleb Image

Life Imitates Chart (knot)

 

 

Bottom Line or D'Ribble:  On the Bane or Scale ?

Alternate Crossfires: Taleb v. Greenspan. 

 

[[Snowden / NSA ? !]]

 

Hume or Mill...**

File(1) ? *(2)



Slate St. Nick makeover*

 

*Not for Children


(1) Daily KOS Fox News Megyn Kelly Santa Claus Race Humor is No Joke
(2) (Slate) Santa Claus Should Not Be a White Man Anymore
(I put the context before the sleigh.)(Look a way[!]?)

Pour[^] Rudolf : In the spirit of accuracy this is even more disturbing.  Does the South Pole have reindeer?  I was hoping but unfortunately, it is another invasive meme.  I was hoping that the image of reindeer pulling a sleigh with a jolly penguin would untie[*] the tongue-in-cheek and unite the world.
[^] = (sic)
[*] belated related inserts ?  Not  f ully parsed(i.e. red yet[!])

Edit note: links (1&2) relocated for sake of spoiler alert and timing thing ! ? 
[In context ? (  ...  ) ] better than festive us?

** emphasis (...) not the duality ofor files.(OW)

Re: Orient / Balance of Powers

UNtill* then,

8 Reasons Democrats Should Refuse a Shutdown “Grand Bargain”

Page Theory.

*pun on field type-O[!]
Speaking of fields or math.(77/22= 213/69?)
 

Filibuster Bluster*

Belated call.
Senate to debate gun control, sort of.
Not to Maddow** it.

*68-31
** (FP!)***

a, b, c, d ... ? ! ?
[a long way to fine men]

4-12-13 So neither of us have to.[!] ?  Knot !
*** Footnotes Page inserted
(Follow Up ? [!]) That's the ticket. Who's serious!
Not to have completed a ribble.

4-13-13 Note: Bane or Fineman (under 4-12-13) Stay tuned [?] !
4-15-13 Of similar note ? Thatcher Notes ?

Post-Pyth

Speaking of headings and lede or ships,

it was not that Greek to me,

other than Pythagoras and the pre-calculus of culture. 
In that *vane* or *weather* the GPS is communcating,
here are some points:

We're in Trouble: Salon / Gore
The Drone Weasels : Slate / Saletan
Secrecy Corrodes Democracy: Consortium News / Parry

While I have not fully read these, I have previously deployed their headlines or sorts *ofor* paraphrases.  Not that they aren't capable of mis-ledes or weasels or being Greek to any of us. 

E-Merging from this? 
It is not just about bending the law but the processes[*] that bend the law. 

[Owe/OW] (fn)

*bracketeds* = pun, [!] or (sic).
[*] late M-bed ? ['n-Oh-particular order!]

2-12-13 Please NOTE My comment below this post,
 Re: PC** and 4 moolahs / mediums.[and 4ms] WU who! [!] ? [speaking of *blank*volutions ! ('n bs)]

Update: LEGEND PAGE, (FC), Updates.

** caution see LEGEND and *aster*risks[!]
i.e. Re:Political Calculus *&* cultured dishes and dashes (O _ U _ C _ H ?)

The Hope

and changey thing.

Honeymoon*?  We barely dated.

[not so random** google]

* Ctrl F "hope"
** random squared (or cubed)
(not so reducks)
[NPR continued parts ]
[Tribute*** to Will Shortz and E.B. White, if not M.C. Escher.]
*** heckuva semantical
[See comment 2]
< previous post >

Jansing&Co,

Thank you for having Grover Norquist on your show today.  Shame on you for not having anyone hold him accountable, exactly.  Yesterday and today Richard Lui sits in for Chris Jansing.
(yet to insert Liu/Norquist:  here)
Earlier Segments.

Then came BraveHeart*: (or vice verse'em) Lui via Bashir
Not to mention Cantor's checkered comment or Little Bo Peep.

*speaking of herding** cats***  or dogs [!]?
** Ctrl F "cats"
*** not that I found the one I thought I would of Clinton herding cats.

Hours later:  No Ticker Tape.
This is to Ed Schultz, Senator Schumer and Plato's Cave.
"Jobs, The Economy and Income Inequality."
Let us hope that there is no dancing in the streets for congress doing what it should.  And as for a Ticker Tape parade for the Iraq war... the military does not suggest it.  Of course it would be about supporting our troops, but the location in the Canyon of Heroes and through the financial district does not seem that main street.

12-23-11 
(See Little Bo Peep: verse us Can't or dancing streets[!] [links added])


Reading Room:
Ron Paul Ghost Writing
Politifact Weird Ranting Whiners
Fair and balanced.
Corporations are people.
Happy  Holidays!

12-28-11
Bubble or Boom, it is in the pop.
A Tale of Two Countries.

12-29-11
NOW with Alex Wagner: Keep quoting polls.[*]
Not.
Mitchell Reports: Huntsman hulling Iowa.
They pick corn? Awe shucks.[**]

[*] must find segment with poll
[**]Ctrl F "hull" in last two, must find Huntsman in prior 7 of last 8.

 < previous post >

The Curve or Nuance Thing

In this I am referring first to the Laffer Curve, which is propably not exactly a Bell Curve..

Now to un-nuance something or other.** The Laffer Curve has generally been used to argue that reducing taxes will increase government revenue. That is also called Supply Side economics. Reduced taxes(for the rich and corporations) will create jobs that will produce things and the economy will grow. Supply money, or not take it away, and it will supply jobs that will supply products and people will buy more. A better economy means better revenue. If people cannot see a few leaks in this theory, it is not just what I may have left out.

Not just the Demand Side, but also the debt side, the outsourcing, and the Wall Street or commodities side are left out. If money is being left in businesses and jobs, it is not being taxed as income. If it has a lower tax rate it will come out as income that will be spent, but there are fewer people in the top tax brackets to benefit the economy than there are in the lower tax brackets who would benefit the economy by having enough money to pay for their needs let alone their demands. Their decrease in taxes, or other income benefits,* would increase demand for products which would produce demand for jobs, which would increase their ability to benefit the economy. Now of course there are dangers to an either/or supply or demand(or any general) approach to the analysis. Then there are the debt, outsourcing, and Wall Street factors. Taxes are aslo a part of how these issues(debt, trade, and investment) effect the economy as generally explained here,(as well as in a more complex equation of the economy) as well as how changes in tax code may help the economy.

This has generally been more about how reduced taxes can help the economy. But there is the correction to the myth that all reducing of taxes increase the revenue. When that is more properly on the curve or in the equation, increased revenue will come from a general rise in the economy, as well as the proper taxation rate which will benefit the debt picture, which will be good for the economy. Now, too much emphasis on the burden of debt, trade and investment risks, must also find itself on the curve or dynamic equation of the big picture as well.

* two charts



** two curves in first paragraph: Ezra Klein and Eugene Robinson
*** yet to fully read, but a note on foreign aid as something to cut with only 1% of the budget. It just might fit into the above understanding of proper balance and investment not that it all is, but a cut in foreign aid may mean an increase or leak in another part of the picture above.

[I hope the above is easy to understand, but then there is the crack pot calling the kettle "stupid". i.e. Wall Street Journal and Bloomberg disagreeing with what Alan Simpson and Charles Krauthammer think.]

[Also Straw Man D'baits Red Herring. Thomas Sowell is right, there is no trickle down. That is because the money needs to be spent at the bottom, but where does the money come from? From the demand and the production of the worker.]

[3-11-11: two links (an update) from State of Thought blog]

A Plan to B-Team

[A Plan to B-Team]
Mike Webb and Bryan Suits on KIRO710 radio last night discussed the comments by Walter Cronkite, that war with Iraq without U.N. approval will be the start of World War III. Bryan made the analogy that if Mr. Cronkite said the sky were green some people would believe him. I may have slightly rearranged the premise but the screener for the phone calls to the show tried to distance the analogy from his point anyway so there is no point in explaining what his point is now.

While waiting to make my comment, that if Walter Cronkite said the sky were green some should give him more credence than the person who puts those words into his mouth presuming to know that the truth is contrary. I guess that is his point, which is a point that can’t be argued. That is easy when one knows the truth. The sky is blue----- or black or gray or white or pink or orange, well that is one way to lose the analogy. My original point being that if Walter Cronkite said something people would give him more credence than to others and at least want to hear more details. While complete credence is something that should maybe never be given to anyone let alone media or politicians.

As the show moved on to other topics I missed the opportunity to use a better analogy I developed while on hold. That is, that if experts said the sky were whatever color several experts could agree, it would not get the attention it deserved until someone of prominence deserved or not (in this case deserved but it works for not) brings it to the attention of the public. Then there would still be skeptics.

There is an interesting parallel here to a story on Slate titled "The Rumsfeld Intelligence Agency" by Fred Kaplan. Apparently the CIA is not deserving of credence, since the Secretary of Defense has a B-Team (article says Team B) sifting through the raw intelligence data on Iraq. So "as his top team member, Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul D. Wolfowitz, put it to the Tim...see certain facts that others won't, and not see other facts that others will." This is a quote I segmented for simplicity, where the challenge may be to see whether it is out of context, but it maybe demonstrates the hazards of looking at "facts" through a prism. My premise is that this quote sums up the administration’s intentions or intelligence as in mentality from leaders of the B-Team. But to put it more plainly (well just another way) it is hard for the administration to assign intentions to others when hiding their own. Now to put it more plainly they are looking for the "facts" that will show Iraq is linked to al-Qaida terrorists while ignoring both contrary "facts" as well as our own history of cooperating with, or aiding and abetting dangerous people or regimes. The questions for the media as well as the rest of us leaves a lot of digging, through the who, what, when, where and how, to get to what anyone can figure are the intentions and those are far from facts.

[4-13-09 UPDATE: heading adjusted, format reparagraphed and link edits] It should also be noted that someone listened to Cronkite, as apparently WWIII was avoided (if not exactly) by the acquiescence of the U.N, if not approval.]

Catch-22*

[Inspired by an Oct. 1st reply to Sept. 24th Michael Kinsley piece in the Eastside Journal, Bellevue Washington.]

What is behind this need for name-calling and labeling? Conservatives, Liberals, good and evil, maybe to keep it simple? But pseudo-intellectuals, where is the point there?

Conservatives certainly aren’t all that bad. They just don’t know any better. Liberals aren’t that good. They just can’t be that certain. But what is the opposite of pseudo-intellectual? It must be either a real intellectual or a complete ignoramus.

Here we seem to have a catch-22. By tossing out such a label, one must imply one knows better. Of course that does seem to cover and reach a large portion of the population. But will they be listening to real intellectuals or the complete ignoramuses who both feel they know better?

Oops! Questioning isn’t part of the process nor patriotic. Neither is the need to listen to any sides. We all know good and evil when we see it. We all know we are the good guys. Now that’s pseudo-intellectual.

* 2-13-12 title(and labels) added due to search