Re:Nexus

Bad Intel.
Greek to sum?
Stochastic(~)Gnostics?

Knot to Re:Cycle ![?]
Clinton Bashir?
The Table ?

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.

Meta-Flack

Nitty Piketty [!]
Or nickety snickers? (spectators)

[Mezzo flack ?  The dOW? 5 6 7 8 ]

( scroll / click ? ) (:~:)
[fb /   y-t]
p-o-b...
c-b- 




ow ?

Gitmo or less.

Justice over there rather than over here.  Authorized war on terror.  Nurse Ratchet.
Authorized use of injustice.

CIA thinks twice on arming Rebels.
Giroux on Neo-Liberalism

The TryAngle of progress?
PIT, CalmPenDium, We R all Right?, 2 Little 2L8
Geometrics!*

 



















*Pardon My Art [!] ~
[False Dialectic?]
~ a. Un-Exceptionalism, b. Punderous Ponderings
Re:ART Forward (Ironically)



Obamacare

I know you R, but what am I?
Healthcare advocate critical of the Affordable Care Act passed by congress.

SOFA

No Bush on the Couch.

Status of Forces Agreement
Status of Fiscal Antagonism

You can't wage* war on a tool.  (FP4)

Truthout Dean, Frame?, Regime Change (FP3)

9-16-14 read (with caviR/cavi@:Regime Rhetoric Reply )
*lost (b.s.)= (i.e.) blog search reference

Bermuda

Try Angle ? 

Before I tan gent:  It is a clear choice. 
It might B 2 late, butt...  'twain GWB and DC*, pre and post selection. 
Not to jump in the Lakoff, but it about Clause Wits** and spectral orders.

[Translation / D'Ribble?: 'tween Bush and world order, or between what Bush ran on(not being policeman to the world), and what America runs on(speaking of spectral orders), the three branches of government and who the heck they work for.  Do we want a second shot at getting democracy right or just war left?  OW!]

* (sc) later: Bush(43)/vP-resident Cheney
**to parse Clausewitz later(or higher archy)

FP(k)not: A. / B. c. D. E. F. trope? ***

*** not to Footnote but NFRY. (Not to bury Neo-Cons, but to place in the mix, nor Peter, Paul or Merry.

Knot taking...

sides {?}!

5-17-14
Nor for the tetraheedrun file.
(NFRY)
(2,...)

5-19-14: Not Fully Read Yet [!] ? ~
(3, ...)
Re:line or anti-Fukuyama

The Dream is Still a Dream**.

Only less* a nightmare.

(2,4,1,3)

1-21-14 to reads Martin Luther King Was a Radical, Not a Saint
to be filed to reads.

*(b.s. only)
**Heading Correction: Most of you have no idea what Martin Luther King actually did

Geneva Accord

Obama Hails Geneva Accord as First in Decade to Roll Back Iran’s Nuclear Program

McClatchy Newspapers (Truthout)

Battle of Amendments?

Or Balance of Fittest ?

Related Flak [?]

[Reboot Reading List]
[No compunction or qualms with how others connect the dots ?]

This in no way* intends to imply that the amendments have any intention of being in any heirarchy, priority or clause.**

* nor weigh ?   [a Lean Forward, b  Rubric's Cube and Rhetorical Realmifications. (b), c, d Ghost of X-mas Passed. , e One Heckuva Day. , f, g It's Obama's Turn , h The Fighting Ill Lie Nigh! , i Social Darwinism 2.0[!] , j Now this is the ticket. , k Weird Google of the Day. , l Speaking of Bowls, m X & Y Chromo Somes]
** (s.c.) scroll click[Maslow, clause(b.s.), wits]
[Reading List, RE:VIEWING, Reading List (UC) ]

[Face the Music ! ? ! (cheer/leader/ship/?)]

Red Line?

Non-Sense:  It never was that clear a red line. 

Diplomatic Nuance and Change Theory ? 
Having read the "Non-Sense" links, there seems* intentional wiggle room**.

*note dates and actually read/redux
**revisited

[To read later. Actually red sooner.]

5-7-13:  THE LAST WORD?

Stock Market Up

...on State of Union. 

Down for the day on Emoti-Cons!*

The market did openly very slightly up, but fell only slightly down.

* A buddy told me he'd judge the SOTU by the stock market opening.  I told him they might be judging on the emoticons of the Republican obstructionist.  Since their smiles are upside down[**], be happy, but the market registered their staying the frown.

"Feel the Love"?

Anger Management.
Caution:  Who you talkin' to?

Too often it is the case in my blogging that I make cultural leaps without fully reading articles. 
Example:  Tan Gent to BaneOr**   
But maybe my GPS Cross Rhodes*** process depends too much upon or may not consider sufficiently a diversity of understanding.  Here I may have perfectly expressed the dilemma/dynamics of rhetorical progress.  To bring it back to Earth, con descend shun is not pretty.  Well, not exactly...
At least I did read the link I am now not paraphrasing*.  My point is that I hope that it is read, but with caution and consideration for whom it tolls. 

*  note that the heading and lede line are referenced in the link, my not paraphrasing is a perspecitivizing. (caution scrolling over as well, some may choose not to bother with the other asterisks, BUT choose well to read the link.)

(PLEASE READ the full text of my post before bothering with asterisks or scroll overs)
** not to associate with the persons or perspectives
***  the pun stops where ?

(Follow-up: Specious and Spacious Species ofor Iron Knee[!])
[Look who's talkin'?  (To be referenced later.)]

[7-26-12: update and effect (label) also re:"understanding"]

Anachronistic Reasoning?

Rational Actors?

The X-Factor?

Not Exactly.

[Note: it was not my original intent to post so much comment. A reading of the asterisks in order,(* through ***) may help the flow of reasoning, such as it is. (i.e. get to *** before reading asterisks.)]

Chomsky/Pillar.

The dilemma*** of dealing with irrational actors, seems to argue that the reason for not allowing Iran to get nuclear weapons, is the same reason for supporting the Republicans for leadership: Only irrational actors can deal with irrational actors.**

Ironically it seems that it is the same reason for nuclear proliferation. Nuclear arms are needed to prevent the will of an enemy from being forced on one's homeland. Hence the irrational* also enforces the rationale that Iran needs nuclear arms for rational reasons.

This is not to argue for nuclear proliferation or disarmament, only to expose the paradox of expecting forces to be irrational, except when it is one's own. And this certainly does not argue for Republican leadership, at least as it expects to enforce their rational behavior on irrational bases. Such rationale is only loose talk or worse, intentional escalation of world tensions, and certainly not incentive for nuclear non-proliferation, global understanding or economic progress.

* not so irrational in the foundations here: as it is irrational to claim that Iran is irrational as a rational for preventing their nuclear capabilities. It is rational just attempting to rationalize behavior despite potential irrationality of the players.

**dualing ironies or double down dueling[!]

[or just dualing down?]

*** this paradox is also rational

This piece is based on a reading of the Chomsky and Pillar pieces.(in light of the "Actors" clip) But not before a re-reading of the complete Kroenig piece in a paper bound edition of Foreign Affairs, not fully available here. I had not yet stumbled on these articles, which may shine more light on the exorcise here.[!] From the former of the last two:

Matthew Kroenig's argument for preventive military action to combat Tehran's nuclear program -- "Time to Attack Iran" (January/February 2012) -- suffers from three problems. First, its view of Iranian leaders' risk calculations is self-contradictory. Second, it misreads nuclear history. And third, it underestimates the United States' ability to contain a nuclear Iran. When these problems are addressed, it is clear that, contrary to what Kroenig contends, attacking Iran is not "the least bad option."

--

Kroenig's inconsistency is clear: If Iranian leaders are as reckless as he seems to believe, a preventive strike would likely escalate to a full-blown war. If they are not, then there is no reason to think that a nuclear Iran would be uncontainable.

[Bingo: just in! Generals against of war ! or "loose talk"^]

[No Fluke? Yeah Right! ...and more Breaking Presidential Press Conference ! And ABC Fact Check is not Fact Check.]

^[Under "loose talk" a self-deprecating reference to my occasions to both hear and speak in-person with General Eaton.]

[Note that "anachronistic" pertains to the reading of the sources and the top three lines, not to mention the ongoing nature of who's interests are reasonable or to be forced, in the flow of the rationalizing. (Also asterisks and late found sources.)]

[Not exactly breaking, but Ed Schultz notes that Bill O'Reilly believes it was "No Fluke", that Sandra Fluke did not get "in front of that committee" by accident. No, she was rejected by a House Committee and was forced to appear before a Democratic Sub-Committee.]

Lean Back

Anniversaries from "Unhistory".

4women: [under construction]

Or should I?

I won't get stuck on numbers, but this is an interesting tangent.

Passing the buck in "the culture war"?

One Million Moms claims there is a culture war.

How is one neutral in what is their war?

Mourning in America:***

for the Raw Money* Class?

It's half-time in America.

(RM** w/Chris Hayes)

*Thanks to Norman Goldman for Mint Raw Money, and a Thom Hartmann caller who wanted a new class label for the 1% if Romney is the nominee. Do we really want to go back to where we were in 2008?

**only a coincidence he is in for Rachel Maddow

*** they used to call it "doom and gloom"

[***B:(link added) I take it back, they doo doo irony! Talk about twisted bridge of rhetoric.]

[2-7-12 An Inconvenient Acronym: PU Action as opposed to just PU**^? Actually it is more*^ of an inconvenient blog search.]

*^ a,b,c

**^ Speaking of Bowls[?] (irony mark: a,b,c,d,e,)("parsed"=a+b)

Format Change

Just as I was about to rearrange my blog a format change has been triggered. As you might note, the link to the title or lede will get you there*, as well as Home under PAGES.

Item 1 as originally intended

Item 2 as previously top of posts and other sources

BLOG ARCHIVE is the most expedient navigation section.

But note E(blogger) box(magnifying glass) < search this blog > box in top left corner, as well as Labels below.

* at this point the default lede link is itself,

if viewed from Home PAGES (anomaly this post)

(image, charts, cartoons and photos to follow)

[Not to mention try angles.]

At this time I would like to archive two Republican Debates to be viewed later.

Meet the Press Video 1-8-12 (factc checks)

And FoxNews. 1-16-12

At some point I may move this page, but for now this will suffice.

There will also be a quibble about whether "Free Enterprise" is on trial, or whether it is Science Friction.**

** see George Will.

< previous post >

Hyper Sorting

The "Liberal Media" is Laughable...
Update
If Only It were Black and White
Axis of Fruit Loops
These links reflect the actual sequence of the last four posts.

The "Liberal Media" is Laughable...
Meet the Press from the week before featured Ron Paul(14 minutes in),
"undoubtably" the scariest thing for Herman Cain.
Then I feature Norman Goldman* "on the other hand"
Followed by two takes on the OWS crowd.

Update
Rovian Republican Recalcitrance(theory)
Attack Strength
SIN
and Spin on the Simpson-Bowles*** and the NRA**.

Axis of Fruit Loops
Martin Bashir on Koch/Cain and Mika Brzezinski on Elizabeth Warren on Morning Joe
* adding 10-31-11
** need Martin Bashir
*** Morning Joe?

[MB- McDermott on debt plans and super committee
Smoked Cheese, etc.]

Hi tech whining. [10-4-11 Republicans Crack Me Up]

Economics 2011

Ravi Batra's Weapons of Mass Exploitation.(Economics For Beginners)
Is the United States broke?
Who broke it?
Economics in One Lesson.*
(Austrian) Economics in One Lesson**

* actually a review of Economics in One Lesson, which includes a caution for those without "a significant amount of economics", they may risk "permanent neurological and ideological damage".***

** Austro-Libertarian Economics (Mises Project Video)

*** seriously [Stick to bold links to be safe: I don't know if it is just me, or my Economics 250 A&B, or my Marx, Nietzsche, Freud 374, but I am not sure I will risk a full read or view of Economics in One Lesson. But I will say, as Nietzche put it there is German thinking and there is Oriental thinking; linear and wholistic (not to put things in black and white). Then (I might say)there is Austrian thinking; not to cast aspersions of intent or geographical origins, but I will follow up with related Economics (and other)links that I feel are helpful.]

Ideology

The perspective one has of society's creation and one's role in it.***

Not* Exactly[!]

[Ideology and Iowa are a lot like the eye of the needle or camel.(no pun)]

[Perspective: to be processed later more or less...[!]
Speaking of ant or fable TV. Democrats cannot afford to have distractions or liars, just because "the Right" does it. Speaking of irrelative**: ant:Anthony, Ed:Rush,(or Beck Or Reck) Whiner:BaneOr, silver lining:golden rule, objective/subjective ]

* iOWa, iRreleFont? Rachel Maddow discusses the "small i" people. But then, eye had not seen her comments.

** something about relative in regards to the differences in ideologies and personalities on spectrum ofor loopiness on the left or right.

***[Media(sources) a side: wMD: I may go on or take hiatus but the bottomline is the top line is mine. i.e. I have only begun the Mike Cormack book, and I am not quoting it. Ibid this bracket.(Thanks to truthout.org for this last crack, not the book]

[!]Hi Ate Us, interesting Try Angle or Segue(way)[]. Or Tr(eye)i Pod?
A.B.C.D...