Sorting sources and conspiracies.

Think Progress has a perspective on this source from Medium,
Counter Punch maybe another.

Looking Back

FIFA
Faith.

Or Looking Forward.

Heck Oven(~)

[Truman's] Indictment.

Colbert's Ire Ron Knee [!] ?

Hume or...* Letterman? [~]

* (5-8-15) links need work

Rough notes.

Bernie/Who: for VP?
(some in mind) (Eaton/Webb?)

Think Progress '~' change status [~]

All in w/ Chris Hayes CJ reform*.
Pulse polls / statistics
Facebook / Fruit salad.

* /~/ BO COO

5-1-15
May Day ! ?

MLK Day

Remembering Martin Luther King Jr.

Robert Parry on Neo-Cons*
Matt Taibbi the Pope and Charlie
Chomski on Obama's Historic Move

NFRY:  No context provided. 

1-20-15
Robert Reich on Compassionate Conservativism
Jeb and Mitt's change of tune belied by reference to Obama. 
Juan Cole on French Diversity and Immigration

*Syria Shift

vOO due: vCR



It's math. In progress.



I have input this date from Think Progess chart.


I won't deWonk, reWonk or futher Wonk, but it might need review.
Translation/legend:  vOO versus Original Obama(budget)
vCR versus Continuing Resolution

[My MSExcel is a rework of Think Progess chart, for thinking sake, as if a visual scan is not enough.]
[I will reviey my cell formulaes but one can alway redo that math.]

So if I may risk putting this into words:

The Senate CR is 18.04% below the Original Obama (budget) that is a compromise. The CR is 1.93% over Ryan's Budget. Is that enough to tell the story of compromise? 

But the (original)Senate Budget was a already 12.05% below OO, which is .(point)66% below the CR. Owe the irony of math and read lines (or shifting bottom lines).  The so-called compromise(CR) is $8 billion over the Senate Budget, $72 billion below the Obama Budget, and $29 billion below the Original Ryan Budget, keeping in mind the general direction of intent.  But grand math wise the Senate CR is $19 billion over Ryan's Budget which I think was compromised(reduced) $128 billion from his original, while the the Senate CR is $217 billion below Obama's Original and $199 billion below actual 2010.  Now that is leverage ... or math. 

Compromise whining aside, CALL FOR A VOTE!

Try-Mentionalism ?[!]

Speaking of Tri[...]*
Think Progress had it's three(best) of the week.

I'm not saying...
I haven't even red[!].

Circular file f(n)or foot in mouth?
Putting myself in other's shoes is more challenging when in their mouths.
This boot strap(lede link) is not the case.
It is a challenge, not that it is in anyone's mouth or maybe only in mine. 
You know, statistics and things...

*reading in progress
[!]: (sic) sars(chasm)

Fiddle Sticks^

by George ...

Lede or Ship Politcal** Gaming*.

(fn)
 Boehner tells Geithner, ‘You can’t be serious 
White House to GOP: It’s your move
“The Hobbit” is not a hipster!

(b.s.) "Lede+or+Ship"
Swift craft
Swift satire
M-bed ***

* by Jenga (enough! )
** un-M-bed
*** not to charm but what the?



[Anacronism of asterisks is a real problem between ** & ***, 
but it was through Slate*** under Osmosis** that I found the Doonesbury.]

[[That's the ticket! But this is a preemptive read. Support for raising taxes on the rich even runs over the barrier Republicans have constructed with their new minority of obstruction(4f), except for their "arithmetic" and Twain. Actually the link at TED did not cover the error that is made when comparing percentiles with shares, or per capita with any tiles and individuals with dollars.  Where4, there is more money in the top 1% therefore the top 1% are going to be paying a greater share of the taxes. Not to be competing with TED, but that means a progressive tax will look more unfair the more unfair income distribution is, unless you have a regressive tax.]]

(4f)= a, b, c, d ?   Crtl F and (b.s). for more moderate yet political approach.

^ last insert ? (See "^" there)  It is called leverage and political capital !
[Follow-up].

Simon says 2 point or...?

2 the N'th of infinity.




Simulphile:
A: The Hill on Benghazi-gate.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f .
g .*
h .
i .

j .

...

Z:  Stench to the N'th.

* preemptive asterisk speaking of ...
(Work in progress A-G-Z, not to Simonize but to file for later.)

To pre-paraphrase or Simon-eyes.  Will Romney have a debate winning joke? 
Will the Republicans in congress do to foreign policy what they have to the economy? 
Choose partisanship uber politics?**

[Footnotes under construction, meanwhile rolling blog search:  Bully Pour-Mitt, or ...  (7-4 to 6-6 )]

**[10-2-12] Thanks to my Bane or Tan Gents, I almost forgot the punchline. Will an attempt at humor have us laughing with Romney or at Romney?  Of course might be directed at Obama but will it be with us or against us?  I can't rule out self-depricating humor but I don't think that will really help him given his etch-a-sketch leaks.  But Walking like an Egyptian Bush will not really do any of us any good. 

NOW: Exception to the Rule?  Fox / Hedge-hog metaphor? (Nate Silver) Not to parse(hyphenate) a pun on hedgehog, nor out FOX the chicken-hawks.  

[I'm not sure I would suggest to the President pinning the V(for victim) on the Robbin'Hoods, but pinning the C (for compromise) on the Dawn Keys might work with almost anything regarding economics.  So try to nail the tale on the pool cue or magic 8 ball.] 
(fn)  [post footnote: Andrea Mitchell Reports Robert Gibbs on the math.]

Jumping the Shark?

FOX so you don't have to...
Newshounds.us
Comic con:
so you* might have to.


Not to dock you mock ...** but Obama will be speaking on Education today.
Not that it was where I was going, but I did google*** the lede.

* put your hand in the hand
** not to skirt the tangent
*** see 2nd "have to" maybe.

GPS of sorts, (not to cross the road but Alex Wagner NOW(p.f. ) mentions the Sissy Fee 'n Task.)
scroll up 'n over, above the art:
Daily Kos, Medicare(so you don't) paraphrase.
youtube, Put your hand...
Robot 6 (art)
Robot 6 (heading)
Newshounds: Akin Redemption
Rationalwiki: FOX

[later: heading NFRY]
[AM: congressional under water]

Footnote:  the Hinge Pin(Not!)...to pun but to point out that it is about having it your way and if the beef (Ctrl F) is on the table, and if the Republicans have been at the table or under the table.
Tip a canoe or K-dense you? 
Mitt 'n Raw Money and Lyin' too.

(p.f.) [post footnote: panel pledge plan pols parsing or seg way ... to this AM?(or off target?) not including News Nation or more on Re-Cycle nor to pun nor pre-empt?]
MBakin to Anti(p.p.f) -Thetical.]
(p.p.f.: Martin Bashir "politics ain't bean ball" ) Martin Bingo!

[8-22-12: Speaking of* cultural metaphors.(Rachel Maddow) ]
R,R,R, or ouch, ouch, ouch.**




*b.s."privitization" Ctrl F order lost mo
** what is truly remarkable about this cartoon( or as Romney would say: Marvelous) is that it just arrived by email with link for Pete sake.

9-4-12 No dis. IsIs?  For rob sake?



Counter

messaging
The Challenges of Messaging: Political Economy Version
RE:"traumatic fun"

Re(The)Cycle*:  Is someone suggesting that Roberts lied (Per S.E.) during his confirmation hearings?

*Think Progress
[Missing Tangent.]

String Cheese Theory?

Or Quantum Theory of Mitt ?

Related Strings:

Ouch[!]

Q E D [!].

You** Tube
Double* Ouch![?]

[Matter / Anti-matter ?  The Declaration of Independence does not have a preamble. Note that Speaker BaneOr misquoted the Constitution, which does have a preamble.  He was quoting the Declaration of Independence which does not have a preamble.  It matters that Rachel Maddow did issue an apology.  Should it Anti-matter that NewsBusters thinks it does? Quote:

 Of course, if she or her crack fact-checking team at MSNBC had done their homework, they would have found "We hold these truths to be self-evident" does indeed come from the Preamble to the Declaration of Independence and not the Preamble to the Constitution as Boehner said. 

     It seems they gaffed their own smug face.

Alas, when one fact checks, especially as arrogantly as Maddow does, you should be completely accurate or you end up looking like a bigger jackass than the person you're mocking.
That oughta wipe the smug, condescending smirk off her face!

Right?]

[Speaking ***^ of Flip Flop? QED!
And I don't mean cue Ed, nor buy George or Bill-E-Club !
But D E^^ Vo ! ?]


*Schoolhouse Oops?
Woe? [!]
** Original Rachel Link is missing under You "THE Word".
*** Bingo [!]

^ Think Progress's link on President Obama's personal evolution.  It is the people that must make the political and legal fight. A president's opinion does not make either federal or state law.  Not that he is not responsible for interpreting and enforcing them.

^^  a day that will live in infamy?
NOT!  Thom Hartmann caller on radio.

5-10-12  Related Issues? Or matters ?
Now with Alex Wagner "The Book of Mormon".

Breitbart Lives!

Not exactly the Starting Point, but Soledad O'Brien "clashes" with Big Journalism** Editor-in-Chief over "critical race theory" and a with-held video.

It almost seems that CNN* is a wannabe FOX or MSNBC.

It is more than swift iron knee that FOX has any concern for material being with-held.

* not to single out or be overly critical of CNN or Soledad O'Brien, but they do seem to be competing for "fair and balanced" between the other two "news" networks. FOX is the veritable "you started it" network. The media was too liberal so they had to have a "fair and balanced" take on their reality. Making room for MSNBC as a counter force. CNN has the real challenge trying not to be either, but still news or journalism in a market environment.

**[aka Raw Money Dot Com or Culture War in context and con text !]

[More perspective or not ? OOPS!]

[It's Alive !]

[in balance here is more]

[3-9-12 Tocqueville lives?*** And so does Calvin and Hobbes?

*** promo(not found) for "Up" balances de Tocqueville's intent.

[BTW: if corporations are people, should they also have...reproductive rights? Please note that I self-edited the last(see cartoon) health reference. (i.e. founding mother of all probes or ultra-sounds?)]

[3-14-12: The Ed Show, The Last Word. Who needs Spin? ]

Close enough...

for government work?
Actually there is a more honorable history to that cliche.

Even preemption* on the flip-flop?

Thanks** to Politics Nation.

*not exactly i.e. four mat draft ***

** yet to insert current link...here or Texas Walker? [follow up]

***11-22-11

What, Me Worry?

No, I am not talking MAD[!].
I am talking math.
And so is Ronald Reagan!

Like the "golden rule" the "Buffet Rule" (not to mention American Exceptionalism) has two connotations.

[Speaking of Mad, here is a slippery slope. A combination of the fallacy of the false dilemma and the boogie man, not to mention divide to conquer. In the last dichotomy, it is the egalitarian from the rest of our founding principles and perspectives*.]

* I preemptively insert as a counter-balance: To be read and transmobilized later. Or should I say, trance figured. But it depends(see post asterisks) on what your definitions of I T R.
[10-5-11 Maybe I should.]
[Duoh!]

[10-6-11 Speaking of trans something.]

Gone Fishing!

I have actually already returned[*].
A lot to catch up on.
Literally! NFRY[!]

[*]not exactly
[Dreams with my Father]

[8-16-11 See Comment One: Down Rigger and fishy comments. Parallel lines and reel bait.]

Still haven't

read all links in the last post, but I will extend the remarks :

There is no policy that President Obama has passed or proposed that added as much to the deficit as the Republican Party's $3.9 trillion extension of the Bush tax cuts. In fact, if you put aside Obama's plan to extend most, but not all, of the Bush tax cuts, there is no policy he has passed or proposed that would do half as much damage to the deficit. There is not even a policy that would do a quarter as much damage to the deficit.

Ezra Klein goes on to say:

The stimulus bill, at $787 billion, would do about a fifth as much damage. But that's actually misleading: The stimulus bill was a temporary expense (not to mention a response to an unexpected emergency). Once it's done, it's done.

But I don't think that the actual "stimulus effect" of the stimulus package or the tax policy can be included in these numbers. i.e. if any tax cuts provide stimulus or raising them would damage the economy

[Let alone]
[BTW: Happy Anniversary to both of us. Political Punch's 5th, my 8th Technically I have not relied much if any, on Political Punch]

Hi Noon?

Reforming Wall Street
(Meet the Press)

[Lo nuance. Or More of the Same?]

[Chalk up a win.]

Equivalence

Principles:
a run on in other words.
Especially important in the rhetorical fields or disciplines.

[posted pre-post 3-1-10]

FAUX NEWS!

I'm not in the mood to play with words today.
But it is nice to see the condemnations of violence from some Republicans, while even those that have, don't recognize their part in lighting the fire by their childish complaints and rhetorical run around with the process. Their complaints [***] of not being included and their complaints of unprecedented partisanship should ring hollow, especially in light of the comprehensive compromises and early sacrifices by Democrats for the sake of pragmatism.

The media plays a big part in not better informing the people. FOX is bad enough, but there is so much reactionary programming, that might be valid yet not really enlighten us on the actual basis in fact and correcting rather than repeating. It seems that there is a political ingredient in this as well as a childish back and forth, but also a misunderstanding of the actual difference in taking responsibility* for one's words and blaming others for politicizing their misuse.

My original thoughts were in support of independent filters, or earlier links, and other sources.

Republican Whip Cantor has complaints about the DNC and the D(triple)C using the threats for political gain.** [Boehner see my comment section]

* Andrea Mitchell(MSNBC): today's link to follow (here): now can we not condone whining?(to Cantor not Pelosi)
** The DCCC have now addressed the difference as well as you (the reader) being able to see and decide in the several links, not necessarily in my rhetoric.
Anachronistic bracketed and segue.
[If one could raise the level of "sophistication" and be able to cherry pick the rhetoric, one could see that politics is only method in resolving things even if you do not feel "responsible" for being in positions of leadership: see Ratigan reference and Hardball below.]

[*** see my call to Boehner's office not to mention what is on their "clean sheet of paper" now.]

[Earlier references to the way media works not to mention this last minute source. And Later Ratigan is a bit of a mix of "targets": see link (here)soon, from which I have pulled the term "sophistication" (above) from a Tea Party guest, even though the host, Dylan might not understand community organizing perspectives or "responsibilities" in other matters, while Hardball might raise it too well.]
Anachronistic segue.
[I will finish with two issues that could easily be too political, but would love the exact words in law, to explain the "abortion funding" and "mandate" issues relationships to reality versus the rhetoric. But I believe it is a fungible economics issue or state options and commerce clauses relationship to the foot in the door and opening the door to get the TOW out in the form of there being room for improvement from both sides.]
[Hardall, "the reality is" in the "stirring up trouble"(segment) that media focuses more on raising the rhetoric and controversy gets more attention and distracts from issues(my take not guests)] and then covering it is called "whipping it up" when to naught is only more to blame.]
[OK, I can't say I didn't "play with words" especially in the last few bracketed's]
[On the other hand, I would like to reflect the reality that Republicans will not run against reform, just more reform, and note that they must now reverse Valentine, not as in massacre but in sending messages and bills that will get attention, hopefully not from their "clean sheet of paper"(meaning not rerun or failed ideas), but incrementals that will get responded to, run on, and even occasionally get up or down votes, only not necessarily with the kind of bipartisanship and change they hope for.]