Give 'em a break!

New Arkansas GOP (Republican) State Chairman Milligan

He said he’s "150 percent" behind Bush on the war in Iraq.

"At the end of the day, I believe fully the president is doing the right thing, and I think all we need is some attacks on American soil like we had on [Sept. 11, 2001 ], and the naysayers will come around very quickly to appreciate not only the commitment for President Bush, but the sacrifice that has been made by men and women to protect this country," Milligan said.

This is a legitimate rhetorical technique. HOWEVER, It does not work the way it was even intended.
Obviously the intention was not that "we need" another attack but that if there was, "the naysayers will come around". HOW? Not unless the thinking was as twisted as those that miss the rhetorical intention in the first place. If there were another attack, why would anyone say, "See, it's working", when the point they are trying to make is that if it were not for everything they are doing, there would be another attack.

Now this leaves alot of the argument off the table, but here is a point that has been left off the table. I hope it is in this hour of The Ed Schultz Show, (it has his take on the debate anyway) but the point was from a caller. How is it that Bush gets credit for protecting our country after the biggest failure since Pearl Harbor? (that is not how the caller put it, but I usually improve or extend points) SEE LINK and Control Find Pearl and check the names there. But his point was that given the warning the new Bush administration had from the Clinton administration about terrorist attacks, they still occurred.

A recent quote from Nietszche I heard- - "If the end doesn't justifies the means, what does?"- - is another rhetorical mind field (mine?) Bush actually said "the end doesn't justify the means", but left off "what does". Power or winning, may be the end but the former is the means to anything, so if power is end and the means, it may only be the end. OK, that is a trickier mine field. Not that it is not how it works, whether you can follow it or not. But back to Nietszche or rather the mind field that got us here. Francis Fukuyama was in the crowd that plowed the field and half regrets it. Now these are even deeper minds, and yes I flip flop from mine to mind, and have not read these last three yet, but I had already tiptoed through others. Or rather I have actually read Fukuyama's apology as well as Huntington's work that addressed even more, and both .* were simply taken as CON text, meaning wrong

Not to be sorted out here, but maybe later.

* Their work, not these pieces.

Their work:
Clash of Civilizations Read
The End of History Did not read.

SHOCK and AWE(UPDATE)

Martin Bashir on Aid to Pakistan [To the President:]

So before he is tempted to cut all forms of funding, I would like to remind him of the wise words that he wrote back in 2006 in his book "The Audacity of Hope." Speaking about the circumstances in which terrorism can flourish, he highlighted failed states and poverty as the two most important factors.

Not to raise any suspicions** but the mission has not been so clearly defined in original reports.

CIA Chief Leon Panetta, later Tuesday told NBC News, "The authorities(sic*) we have on Bin Laden are to kill him. And that was made clear. But it was also, as part of their rules of engagement, if he suddenly put up his hands and offered to be captured, then they would have the opportunity, obviously, to capture him. But that opportunity never developed."

But back to the issue of aid. See raise link.

Using stringent language, a statement by the Pakistani Foreign Office said, "Such an event shall not serve as a future precedent for any state, including the United States."

This is clearly a nuanced not "stringent language". But if,(and I mean A BIG IF) Osama bin Laden has been hiding in this compound for six years, it is difficult for the Bush administration to take much credit for the success of this mission, (let alone waterboarding). And while President Obama has been clear on the issues of failed states and poverty being part of the security equation, it is hard to expect Pakistan to be totally free of corruption or political and intelligence intrigue, let alone competence***. It is much easier to speculate and develop tin foil conspiracies that may actually be based on some evidence, and to use them to destabilize, than it is to change things at home let alone for another country. As the right seems to paint themselves into the corner of hypocrisy, the President has the responsibility of being the cherry picker and decider-in-chief. And in connecting the dots of the likes of the latest Right, (remember A BIG IF) then there must be some logic that the Bush administration must be further scrutinized for their part in a $1.4 trillion escapade of terror. How can we hold other countries responsible for competentencies when ours (and often rightly so) are so political?

* my (sic)inserted maybe "authorizations"?
** it is not the "fog of war" it is the fog of understanding and journalism
*** there is some irony in this linkage given prior asterisks
[Apologies for the nuance and dynamics of this threading, it is tricky to deal with the likes of some thinking, let alone journalism. And it was not my intent to necessarily minimize incitefulness or skirt a tin-foil issue or weave Teflon administrations.]

[While I may have great peripheral vision, I link the link weave last, but it was embedded in any above(3rd link).]
[Breaking news (which might be broken), apparently they will not release the photo of bin Laden, the argument is that there may be no pleasing some.]

[Further Embed Meant: Pakistan and speaking of timing. The death of A BIG IF?]
[Back to My TetraHeDron? Not Exactly!]
[Post Post In-put]
[Pre-Post er us in - put?]

Thursday, May 05, 2011
No Photos
"cathartic moment"
Now* to America's Future

*actually see not so Pre-Post er us reference to in-put(above). Also on Rumsfeld. On Stiglitz. Doing Justice?
[Important flip-flop or fair and balanced rearrangement regards the perspectives of Samuel P. Huntington and Francis Fukuyama. From Clash of Civilizations I may have cherry picked or perspectivized my analysis via tangential influences. While Francis Fukuyama has corrected his alignment from The New American Century, from renouncing the Bush administration to supporting and influencing the Obama Doctrine, it is not just ironic that the tag line for the issue of release of the bin Laden photos is, "It is not who we are" nor that the likes of the right see almost everything as a culture war. Or that both Bush and I were opti-mystic,(yeah right, he was) and why we now have hope.

Para~graph Three!

Endo-terror~cism?

aka Academics ?

The point?  The esoterics of Strauss maybe the Socratics of Plato, or exoterics of Neitzsche.

Ctrl F (academic:~:academics)
:::  aka [a. FOOTNOTE JUNE 2013 PAGE TWO, b. The Daily Counter Balance , c.(J) In the begining... , (D)BoC, e. Belated Breaking News! , f. THE COUNCIL OF NICE , h. Back-Log August 19th, ("religious ghetto") , i.(G).]
:::   ? [a. Looking Back , b. "if I were dictator" , c. What's good for the goose? Goose the gander! , d. Bane(Or) Change , e. Conservative Foray (4A) ,  f. Blame to go around? , g. Will Safire Replaced by Will I ams., h. Academic Freedom , i. Framing Narratives , j. In the begining... , k. Technical Difficulties , l. The Thorn and the Lyin' , m. Running Joke , n. Let me finish? , o. We are at the table. , p.Forward (Ironically)  ]
(what the fudge?  f-j,p?)
:::   Endo-suffix?

The project  ?   The dance? 
"Esotericism is the practice, widely employed by a variety of thinkers prior to and up through the early Enlightenment, of disguising their real meaning through ellipsis, surface contradiction, dispersal of their real arguments, and the like (indeed—they were misleading casual readers about their true intentions!). The understanding that philosophers like Plato and Aristotle made use of esotericism was central to Strauss’s own project of returning to their thought as an antidote to what he called the “crisis of modernity”, since it pointed to deeper truths hidden behind the evident meaning extracted by superficial readers. It was probably also one of the sources of distrust of Strauss and his followers by other academics, since it implied that initiates into the art of esoteric interpretation had access to meanings unavailable to others." Francis Fukuyama.
Or Ecto~tonics of Aristotle?  Less than Ionic that paranormal came up in  English [?]
P.4,The Prince misquote? P.5 "undermine dogmatism" bingo~? P.6 Nietzsche Recurrance
"That latter struggle was ultimately won, and led to the triumph of the “harmonist” view, now almost universally accepted, that philosophical truth could be made compatible with and indeed supportive of modern politics. Transparency is today the name of that venerable game. Classical philosophers like Plato and Aristotle had a different view; namely, that philosophical skepticism undermined the irrational beliefs necessary to the maintenance of a political community and therefore needed to be kept under wraps. As Melzer points out, there is a large body of contemporary scholarship that actively contends that virtually no one other than a few cranks ever wrote esoterically; he performs a great service by, first, showing that the claim is empirically wrong, and second, that it is itself an historically contingent interpretation." (ibid.)
 
2-25-15 2 ~ B Kantinued ;-) R I P ? [!]
(1) a. Who Let the Dogs Out?, b. The Undisclosed Bunker Branch of the Government., c. ...what about the damage to your Presidency?, (d.) The Curve or Nuance Thing, e. Doxology.
(2)~
(3)  The Be All and End All?

Pen~ta-gone? i.e. P5
"This section of the book is wonderfully erudite and leaves no uncertainty that esotericism was indeed a major art that is now all but lost. Melzer points to four reasons for past uses of esotericism. First, it served as protection from prosecution; he notes its widespread use in totalitarian countries like the former Soviet Union and contemporary China. Second, it served to protect the political community from dangerous truths, such as philosophical skepticism about the city’s gods and traditions; third, it served a pedagogical purpose by forcing readers to engage on a deeper level; and fourth, it was used as a transitional strategy for modern writers seeking to undermine dogmatism." (ibid)
P6?  At this Platonic # I will note Aristotle's place in the Nietzschean struggle.  
Hence Fukuyama is a difficult read of Strauss and Plato who are difficult reads.

P7? "If Philosophy Between the Lines were simply a book..." (where P = par.) I might plow on[!]
@9   "Strauss’s central concern was what he called the 'crisis of modernity', where the project of using philosophical reason for practical purposes was in danger of collapse."
@12 "The recovery of the rationalist project was central to Strauss’s life work—"
Having now fully read it, I will let you decide.

GOLEFT TV

Finally: Real News Featuring video from progressive hosts. (Some from Air America Radio)
The choir grows. (The local affiliate)

[subtitled: STOP THE LOOPINESS! ]
But hold on to your seat, following these links can be challenging to your sense of peace.
Example: and this is a moderate one
Air America (select program)
The Randi Rhodes Show
Senate Democrats introduce Habeus Corpus Restoration Act of 2007
The vicious cycle completed
"as long as..."
NSPD51
But I don't have time for the ride.

An even worse ride:Plan Ready for Iran
On watch list for some time
Science Fiction or...

It might be one thing for Empire to win, but who will be the loser, even if it could? Not China or other powers, no matter what they choose. Failure is too scary to imagine, but progress is even scarier work. And with preemption on the table?
"Help me Obi-Wan///"
There is no secret message there or suggested solution, but it may not be just about "the force", but every player has a part and countries and corporations seem to play for keeps.
"As long as" who is the dictator?

"Failure is not on option..." is the most true oxymoron *. Failure is a result we must live or die with. In the case of the NSPD51, if failure is not preempted, or caused, it is at least incentivised and to some rewarded.

[apologies for a linky piece, all of which I have not read, and for any excessively creative wording *]

[It is funny how I seem to form a rather loopy cycle myself, as I had intended to insert somewhere a Huffington Post link. Not that particular one, but just the site in general. Speaking of Generals: Wesley Clark. Speaking of failures. Putin's eyes, which Bush looked into. (see paragraph before last "other powers") Our only hope.]

THANK YOU: Progressives Everywhere, in particular Huffington Post and Common Dreams
Speaking of forutituous links. The Telegraph and mine
with a search of "telegraph" and search "blows" it. Speaking of dreams. It is about the nightmare.

Democrats are about the American dream, Republicans are about keeping it that. And even the dream is a nightmare for the world.

* there is probably a better word for it, but then look at what we are dealing with.

[11:08 AM - - As I have noted, I have not read or reread all of the above links, and there are even some that I had intended to, but I must add this one,{Illiberal Moderates: The Global Swing Vote} by Amitai Etzioni - - a piece which I did just read and suggest caution in reading and sorting it out, but I do agree with it's approach. I have been familiar with his work prior to 1995, and that may have been important in my seeing the "grand misconception" even before I knew who was promoting it. Re: the misconceptions of Huntington and Fukuyama.]

AM Calm PACtification

Is it KBH who suggests on Andrea Mitchell* that the president is not negotiating?
Apparently the end is near[!]
(Ctrl F Nietzsche/End of History)
Not to pun on will or Frederick or Fukuyama,
but a new para-dime, and the summit of our perdicament.

* 9-27-13 Thought so. She held Cruz's seat. The President campaigning, delaying, tweaking.  Ctrl F, "stomach", "framework" but  George F. Will , says complete the neutering.  And I had yet to see his Ike reference.(FP1) c-[!] 9-26 & (O+drama) (FP2) "end"/"is" & C- Ctrl F and cap it toll ization.

 

Mises...

in the corner ?

Caution: I have only read the last link, and this might seem a balancing* of fallacies**.
Just because you don't agree with someone doesn't mean they have nothing to offer, and of course your perspective might influence both.  Ths seems more a selection of unfinishted reads, although I did read Huntington, and gave a good shot at Sandel, and found Hasnas, and Fukuyama is a big bugaboo, as we come around to Nietzsche and Rand. 

*read juggling ?
** all thinking must be taken in the context of their times as well as the method of the format.
example:  Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, Augustine***, Aquinas and the web they weave sometimes in character or others.  Not to mention More's the Pity.

a. A Shot in the Arm?
(b.)^ The Bully...
c. GOP-GAP

^ new notation for (sc)
*** Punderous Ponderings
[Speaking of the corner, is it MAR (mutually assured rhetoric?)  The corollary, just because some have something to offer, does not mean they got it.]
(pocket ?)

Presently Pre-

Occupied with matters closer to home...
I don't have time for this re- search, or rather more than a glance at it.
Fukuyama on "The U.S. has basically failed in the major objective of it's foreign policy." My take, "liberal democracy" is not as he knows it. In other words, we have more "hard work" on it at home before we export it.

Recommended reading in this area...

Center for American Progress: The Fall of the Bush Empire.

"If there’s one empire I want built, it's the George Bush empire," said former Bush adviser and Republican National Committee chairman Ken Mehlman in 2005 [One Party Country, p. 102].In this effort to spawn an empire in the federal government, the White House and the RNC have opened up unprecedented lines of communications and have potentially violated federal law in doing so. In a recent investigation into the Bush administration's use and destruction of e-mails from RNC accounts, House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Henry Waxman (D-CA) found there may be "extensive" violations of the Presidential Records Act, which stipulates that the President take "all steps as may be necessary to assure" that the activities of the White House "are adequately documented." "This should be a matter of grave concern for anyone who values open government and the preservation of an accurate historical record," said Waxman. Also under investigation is the White House's violations of the Hatch Act, which prohibits partisan political use of federal government property. The Oversight Committee uncovered serious abuses of both laws by the White House in order to secure electoral victories.

I suspect the above link is not specific and I will follow this up later, with the meany embedded links in this from the Center for American Progress.

[Links now embedded,but not read.]

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

Bin(un)Jun'Go

2 links
in progress.
Steve Smith (watching)in progress. [('n Strauss)!]

Previous reference and reL8ted viewings.

i.p. Fukuyama/Kaplan...

(ReLabelism)
[/] 1. (FP!) , 2. Proof of Life... 3. The Hope
i.p.  1.  ★Re-initialism★ , 2. Mises... , 3. Cultural Threads are Fine. 4.  Neo-Context

March Forth ?  [Lost in the Phrey?]

3-5-15: 1st things (above 'n labels!). 
Lede or Ship? [C-font!] (intro/content/) (heading/goal?)
Bin- parsing of bingo and un-circular file / (un)~Jung or circular / Go~Hegelian [!]
Line 3 some articles and links re: Steve Smith (Straussian?)
L4: PR& Strauss Lectures.

Note: It may not be obvious, but I don't always get back to read everything labeled NFRY or NFR.
While NFR may mean not necessarily needing to, NFRY indicates a hope to.  Then
fortuitus $hits happen.  Like the opening of the last link(LM frying pan), and the parsing of 4-2-it-us?  Not to men shun(A2~?)   [ahhhh! ???] Let alone one liners.*

Now to the^^ point at the mo'ment.  Acon Ference? **

*(FPip)(???)~ The Un-Revolved(~) Thread / (ahhh)~ commercial goat scream / (?)~Jenga / (A2)~et tu / (shun) USCroll click / (men)~[lost or redone'dented] / (to)~Jung& / GnotS

** a file of sorts un red[!]or yetT for 2? (Or tent4text) /~gno-M~BA
Loose unMbeds? O'w[!]? ^
^D'Ribble saved in draft
^^ 2B read and viewed
[ final note !: that's the ticket ? ] ( fp: Still in draft? ) [knot necessarily gunuh]
fur cation?




Saux?(~\~) ow~/~ew what?



That's what!

Dukes or Hazzards

Or
Perils* of Paul-ien**? 

*NYTimes subscription required or use of your alloted limit:
(in lieu of scroll click) David Brooks ~ Building Better Secularist
**NFRY: reading in progress former(*) embedded in latter(**)

Rather than further annotate or embed links... (dot, dot, dot)
TBS(2 B S...) Fukuyama Strauss
2. ★Re-initialism★ / Mises... / Cultural Threads are Fine. / Neo-Context ?
B. SHOCK and AWE(UPDATE) /\ /, Give 'em a break! //,  Mises... /,  Technical Difficulties  /?/, GOLEFT TV [!]
S.  E A R C H : Flash Back, Fast Forward, Regime Rhetoric Reply, Open Threads.

[or / of rawls ? P'op'e ?]

Primary Boogeyman

Rule to the Exception.
Freedom / Hardball
Mitt Romney wins, Paul 2nd, Huntsman 3rd.
Gingrich and South Carolina next.
Huntsman ticket to ride or flavor of moment?

Yeah that's the ticket, but here is even more.

There is the old adage "divide and conquer",
but then there is the exception that proves the rule.
If Republican political calculus is anything, it is attack strength.
Economic Freedom is the key.
What it means, is the meme.
Absolutism may be the red flag of the Teddy Bull,
but the cape* of the progressive.

*Ctrl F "Nietzsche"

[Romney indeed made history as the first non-incumbent Republican to win both Iowa and New Hampshire, but given recent history, Fukuyama and the Neo-cons, it seems to fit the Primary Boogeyman frame, not to mention unprecedented Bush the Uniter.]

[1-11-12 CBS Christie Does Cynical Well, "Jersey-Style" **
CBS Poll Romney beats Obama,
Michelle Beats Anger.]
[My original intent here yesterday, was a Primary Colors reference, and a pun on Exception to Rule, not The Rule, but don't step on my blue suede shoes. (Reference post-**)]

[** I mean the Governor of New Jersey does "lame" well, if as Romney's "hit man" he is accusing Obama of not doing anger well.  Is that Neo-Boogeyman?  A flip-flop of the Doom and Gloom, and more of the Fear and Smear.  Governor Christie is the Sarah Palin with Lip Schtick.  Ouch, that was not to imply that he is a VP choice, but given the frame maybe.  When I use Hyperlink, I use Hyperlink. ]

[4a continued:  Freedom is not a tool***, but an end that doesn't justify economics.  This is my riff off of only the 1st paragraph of The Economist, on Economic blogs and "A less dismal debate." After reading it more fully(see ***) a funny thing happened on the way to the for 'em.  Actually it only hinges on the "tool" concept and the nature of "innovation" and the nature of economic debates.  Not that I have more than glanced at the debate example, but it also hinges on the nature of people as well as material or ideological forms.]
*** again note anacronism of 4m (see asterisks and bracketeds) as I evolved the post comma segment.[being in magazine 4m another one of the 4a.] (Note technical difficulties, uncertain if any threads or hyperlinks are lost, but I close in the middle of reading Marginal Revolutionaries in hard copy.)]


< previous post >

FOOTNOTES PAGE TWO September 2013

9-10-13 (By Polar...) (b.s.)1. A. Way, Too Point Oh? \ 2 .A., B. Killing Fields of Dreams, C. Proxymoron?, D. That is the ticket!, E. Tea Party Down Grade , F.Congress- - to boldly go... 

9-13-13 Polar (b.s.) R. Politics (2nd shot edit)(s.c.) // NOW: The Rush 'n Ballet //
1. - Echoes of Past Presidents and Wars., B., By Polar, D. Neo-Context, Bush Is No Reagan.  2. - A. R.S.V.P. , 3. - A. Carry On Comment! ,  // NOW Bigger Badder than Ever? // B.  A Modest Proposal,  SJM 8016 / US Attorney Scandal, D. Post Script , HOLD OF(F) COURSE

9-19-13  Talk about tangent of course ! [?]   (FP3-tba)

9-25-13 C: / /  Originally used as a seg weigh. But needs plumbing. OW !
9-27-13 *(Fukuyama) SHOCK and AWE(UPDATE), Give 'em a break!,  AM Calm PACtification, Primary Boogeyman, Technical Difficulties, Presently Pre-, GOLEFT TV. (is) "will to power" Dateline: August 10th, 2005 [?]

9-30-13 Note  Ctrl F "choice" finds it @ obtuse.

Divide to conquer?

Or back fire*?

This is a geometrical analysis of the partisan nature of politics.  We are familiar with the terms Fiscal and Social Conservative. But then there is the un-like Ike wing** and the Atlas Shrugged foundation or ^ fountain.  Here I may have already divided, to fight on.  I will try to keep the links and notations down. 

From what was earlier work on The Third Way, akin to the moving the center off the absolute, the moderate left seems to be moving the country.(See 1st link).  But is more than about geometrics of the left and the right and there being a middle.  If conservatives have branches(BTW the gov meant has three^^^); the FC and the SC (owe the irony oar^^), is there a third or more? 

A "friend" is counting on either a Tea Party, Conservative or Republican landslide this year.  But I am concerned with how branches work and how if there were already two, how Godwin[!] might play[?] Which is a sarcasm[!]slash[?]tangent on the hazzards of branching.

* not to target
** un-like Ike (USC)
Tin Foil Herman
R.S.V.P.
Mmmm MOW, MOW

^ oar shrug heads?(sc)
^^ paddle Fiscal Cliff and (YOU)Scroll Click or NEO-CONservative bent

[!] punctuation mark for irony/sarcasm/rhetorical***

*** anachronistic inserts [Francis Fukuyama was in the crowd that plowed the field and half regrets it.]
^^^ 3-body fig Newtons.or Phig Physics

BTW: USC is one of my alma maters.  UW the other.  But here I play on the initialism of "You Scroll Click" and Al Gore Rhythms and anomalies of the (b.s.) blog search[!]   

Final Note: Under wiki of Divide And Conquer ? [!] (or pyth helmet ?)

Go Hawks !

Technical Difficulties

Anomalies or Synchronicities? By definition they are hard to explain. But there was first the missing link that I referenced here and then the Eli Pariser "bubble" context. Then there is the Wrap(5***) problem* and follow up **.

* in context is biased
** also needs follow-up and labels
*** anomoly (2) / anomaly(1) (W itch Are)
[then there is the Al Gore Rhythm Spell Check problem, and follow ups.]
(note: numbers in (brackets) are links as found in search to check any change in the algorithms C-W r a p(5).)
Note: Psychology Label added, Physics and Philosophy already applied(6), not necessarily used well.
[By Jove I may have it.]
[Speaking of hunches Gingrich may be wit Mitt. He may be making Mitt and others look good, and working the churned media for his own Obamanation.]

Thursday, May 19th, 2011
Technical difficulties is no pun on Speaker Boehner calling the government broke or Ed Schultz calling it broken. Or was it? Given the anomalies and synchronicity theories who knows? But it was about looking at my own modus operandi and then blogspot having its difficulties and Eli Pariser's TED Talk on the Internet. The word follow-up(4) may have popped up and is applicable(2 to insert here).

Friday, May 20th, 2011
Speaking of difficulties, I had to correct yesterday being Friday. I guess I get a second shot. Note Psychology Label added for reasons then above and follow up, references "rational expectations" not to mention talk and guts. (Bush v. Lakoff) Speaking of talk, yesterday's inserts (2 became 3) are economic talks(YouTube) from INETeconomics.org. And a reminder that problem* above is a Koch Brothers spin. And note to self** is still pending* while I might return to Risk and Robustness.

Since it is Friday and I have several posts in draft that relate to this link, I might note that this is still under construction if I ever get back to it. But in this regard I will say that this is the first INET link I watched and have found several others I might recommend that have been imbedded above but will simple list here:

Raghuram Rajan: Delineating the Role of Government
Also see prior ** not fully read yet but gives context right off the bat***
Lance Taylor: Maynard's Revenge
Reforming the Macroeconomic Framework: Sushil Wadhwani
IMF Calls for New Economic Thinking: Or Does It?

Keynes in a box? I will not expound upon this academic pun except to note the room and a flip-flop. i.e. what I took from Huntington and what Fukuyama may have learned or changed.

*scroll or click but nfry = not fully read yet
**Why I am not an Austrian Economist
*** see can(under bat)

[Not So Frackin' Funny: Demand a...side. (or Borg)Not Pop'nCulture]