Hillary
Bernie
Trump
no trump ?*
file this **
*the Summer of Trump
** Amazon Culture
8-18-15: GPST
Donald Trump geometers like a third grader. (^)
Speaking of Self-tense. OW: Geo-Political Self Tents?
Sub-reference: Putting perspective in one's own frame.
Not to take my own tangent, but Hillary and Bernie are under pressure from many angles to craft their message so that it matters to the perspective of their critics. Nothing should take away from the words in this heading. Trump is another case of geometry at work***, formerly known as triangulation of the third way.
Back to what matters!? Do they feel the Bern? The operable "they" being the parties and campaigns, it is good exercise, or in some cases exorcise.
*** culture at work? (see: file this / bridging the law of intended consequences?) **
[Tea Party / Trump Party? 50 state scream? Why is there no Colbert of the Right?]
[As a not so side note: I cannot believe it has been a year since Ferguson. (~)
BTW: having been on somewhat of a successful sabbatical(correction: hi8us), there is a gap in my coverage as well as my social net.]
(^) not to be technical, but not sure of the grade
(BLM: budgets literally me~de~8!)
Showing posts sorted by date for query "do nothing". Sort by relevance Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by date for query "do nothing". Sort by relevance Show all posts
Monday, August 17, 2015
Wednesday, July 30, 2014
Where does this fit?
Two Congresses less than one "do nothing"? RMS*
-/-
Congress sues the president for not implementing a law they wanted to dismantle.
They didn't want the mandate, but they wanted it now.
Proof of the Rove strategy, it's political.
They don't want to impeach because Democrats would want to run against that.
They want him to not follow due process for the border crises that is a result of a law they passed.
But proof that it is not political, that's the ticket.
It is not political because they are sticking up for the process exactly on a law that they don't want to process. Which is exactly why the congress is so popular and the president only relatively so.
It's political, and it's not political, but the people need to decide which political non-political game they want congress to play.
DEVO?*
Where does what fit?
*also V insert 7-31-14
-/-
Congress sues the president for not implementing a law they wanted to dismantle.
They didn't want the mandate, but they wanted it now.
Proof of the Rove strategy, it's political.
They don't want to impeach because Democrats would want to run against that.
They want him to not follow due process for the border crises that is a result of a law they passed.
But proof that it is not political, that's the ticket.
It is not political because they are sticking up for the process exactly on a law that they don't want to process. Which is exactly why the congress is so popular and the president only relatively so.
It's political, and it's not political, but the people need to decide which political non-political game they want congress to play.
DEVO?*
Where does what fit?
*also V insert 7-31-14
Friday, March 21, 2014
Your Darn?
You're Republican if you do, you're Republican if you don't.
The Obama cares of the Affordable Care Act.
Re: Healthcare is a right, that must be paid for.
Republicans want to undo the legislation without having their own plan. It makes it easy for them to play the victim. They can be against something that they were a part of but against all along. It was concieved from the right and obstructed by the right. But dismantling it would be only a mess age.
I know, the irony is too steep. But progress really requires accountability, as Rush plays the victim of culture backlash. But not having a plan, and having nothing to be for but what was before. Their logic is wackamole(see O'Reilly/Bachman). And Democrats have the accountablity of paying for what Republicans aren't able to take away. In other words, it would be fine, if we could simply keep what
works without forcing it to be provided or determining who pays for it. But that is actually the irony of their baselessness.
Darn, I didn't. Original Post not posted March 21st, 2014.
P.S. Your Darn (STET)
The Obama cares of the Affordable Care Act.
Re: Healthcare is a right, that must be paid for.
Republicans want to undo the legislation without having their own plan. It makes it easy for them to play the victim. They can be against something that they were a part of but against all along. It was concieved from the right and obstructed by the right. But dismantling it would be only a mess age.
I know, the irony is too steep. But progress really requires accountability, as Rush plays the victim of culture backlash. But not having a plan, and having nothing to be for but what was before. Their logic is wackamole(see O'Reilly/Bachman). And Democrats have the accountablity of paying for what Republicans aren't able to take away. In other words, it would be fine, if we could simply keep what
works without forcing it to be provided or determining who pays for it. But that is actually the irony of their baselessness.
Darn, I didn't. Original Post not posted March 21st, 2014.
P.S. Your Darn (STET)
Sunday, December 01, 2013
Too Random...
...Righty[!]
Knot 2 fraught with fraud'nfreud?
Freedom the foundation or fountainhead?
A stopped clock is right...
too undimention,
1* over infinity has left.
* poetic license in 3 or 4-D.
won over
**
knot exactly; 1/infinity= zorro?
But seriously to unpun one in particular, freedom over everything is the problem.
Freedom over everything equals nothing over physics.
12-2-13 (...)added and *reframed
** s/b standard mobius/infinity (Thought I had previously used one, not this one.)
Embedded links:(Not fully read.)
1. The Difficulty with Hegel
2. Hegel or Anti-Hegel
Fully Read and Reviewing:
The Hegel Myth and its Method: (Kaufmann 1959)Akin to Plato's Form(The Socratics of the Ideal and States)^
Selections:
"The writings of Hegel and Plato abound in admittedly one-sided statements that are clearly meant to formulate points of view that are then shown to be inadequate and are countered by another perspective. Thus an impressive quilt quotation could be patched together to convince gullible readers that Hegel was — depending on the “scholar’s” plans — either emphatically for or utterly opposed to, say, “equality.” But the understanding of Hegel would be advanced ever so much more by citing one of his remarks about equality in context, showing how it is a step in an argument that is designed to lead the reader to a better comprehension of equality and not to enlist his emotions either for it or against it."
"Hegel was rarely cited in the Nazi literature, and, when he was referred to, it was usually by way of disapproval. (...) Rosenberg also stressed, and excoriated, the “Socratic” elements in Plato."
References to 3D/4M@. English***, Math, Form~process.
*** generic word language/numbers as an ideal and a language/so-called results.
I do not necessarily want to break out of my understanding of Hegel, not say he would have understood it my way or anyone else's. But is Popper properly popped? Yet I do use a method of labelism/reference/progression-digression. The hazards of the Internet, not to mention old material, one might not recall running into sources before. I developed my tetrahedron courtesy of my older work on The Republic(1970~), delineating the mass-energy equivalence formula, and possibly Milo Wolff.(2004~)
In the above not yet reads, but glanced at's, they may have a point, and may be missing or pointing from their own point. I may yet to agree or disagree with them, but still appreciate or depreciate their points.
^ & ~ must be reviewed. "Dates~" note time of encounter.
12-3-13 (FP1) Have yet to locate "^". [rtd]
12-4-13 That's the ticket ! ?
But to tilt at swans?
12-9-13 Roughly 13 in rough.
12-10-13 Scientific American Dispute over Infinity Divides Mathematicians
verses RealClearPolitics Newtonian Government
Trinity Squared ?
Knot 2 fraught with fraud'nfreud?
Freedom the foundation or fountainhead?
A stopped clock is right...
too undimention,
1* over infinity has left.
* poetic license in 3 or 4-D.
won over
**knot exactly; 1/infinity= zorro?
But seriously to unpun one in particular, freedom over everything is the problem.
Freedom over everything equals nothing over physics.
12-2-13 (...)added and *reframed
** s/b standard mobius/infinity (Thought I had previously used one, not this one.)
Embedded links:(Not fully read.)
1. The Difficulty with Hegel
2. Hegel or Anti-Hegel
Fully Read and Reviewing:
The Hegel Myth and its Method: (Kaufmann 1959)Akin to Plato's Form(The Socratics of the Ideal and States)^
Selections:
"The writings of Hegel and Plato abound in admittedly one-sided statements that are clearly meant to formulate points of view that are then shown to be inadequate and are countered by another perspective. Thus an impressive quilt quotation could be patched together to convince gullible readers that Hegel was — depending on the “scholar’s” plans — either emphatically for or utterly opposed to, say, “equality.” But the understanding of Hegel would be advanced ever so much more by citing one of his remarks about equality in context, showing how it is a step in an argument that is designed to lead the reader to a better comprehension of equality and not to enlist his emotions either for it or against it."
"Hegel was rarely cited in the Nazi literature, and, when he was referred to, it was usually by way of disapproval. (...) Rosenberg also stressed, and excoriated, the “Socratic” elements in Plato."
References to 3D/4M@. English***, Math, Form~process.
*** generic word language/numbers as an ideal and a language/so-called results.
I do not necessarily want to break out of my understanding of Hegel, not say he would have understood it my way or anyone else's. But is Popper properly popped? Yet I do use a method of labelism/reference/progression-digression. The hazards of the Internet, not to mention old material, one might not recall running into sources before. I developed my tetrahedron courtesy of my older work on The Republic(1970~), delineating the mass-energy equivalence formula, and possibly Milo Wolff.(2004~)
In the above not yet reads, but glanced at's, they may have a point, and may be missing or pointing from their own point. I may yet to agree or disagree with them, but still appreciate or depreciate their points.
^ & ~ must be reviewed. "Dates~" note time of encounter.
12-3-13 (FP1) Have yet to locate "^". [rtd]
12-4-13 That's the ticket ! ?
But to tilt at swans?
12-9-13 Roughly 13 in rough.
12-10-13 Scientific American Dispute over Infinity Divides Mathematicians
verses RealClearPolitics Newtonian Government
Trinity Squared ?
Thursday, August 29, 2013
Buy In or Sell Out
Red Lines and Towing the Line(on Syria).
The President is not putting America's credibility at stake, he is staking out the credibility of International Law and Globalization. This is a far cry from the Bush Era "war" president and unifier.**
Pre-title or heading: Rogers' Soap Box, might read "Pit Lip Schtick ".
Related: The Vatican, Steve Clemons, Steve Benen, Maddow Blog, [Boehner let her.]
8-30-13
From Thomas* Roberts, on Crisis in Syria: Re-Bolt On / Bring Em On [!]
(scroll click) Bay of Pit Bulls or Bay of Lip Schtick?
Wiping the Floors @ the UN[!]
* Italics reminder re:(un-bolds too)
** ibid[!]
(FP!)
(b.s.) read Make it so.
Bolt On: A. Toning Down the Lines. , B. Waiting for [Calm Cast] , C., D. Trick Question of the Day? , E.
Bring
Em On: a., b., c., {}D. Congress- - to boldly go... , E. Everything is on the Table! {Why not Hagel?}
{Will Obama declare the end of a war?/ Fix of war powers?}
*** (b.s.)
[(NOW) SOS Kerry]{..."standing on ceremony"}, }by Ghosh{, ^ un-telegraph/playbook
Clear segue: Secretary of State Kerry begins w/ my running notation
["read", un-Rumsfeld "know", smoking "social media", ^ }pinnacle of our perdicament{, "risk"/"do nothing","matters"..."know what we know", "respect" ... }general body/China-Russia-Arab signators/jury{ "ultimately".] close. [SOS]
Note: Quotation "marks" =Kerry comments, ^ marks= tangent to NOW, }{ = marks/highlites my comment/{urgency of now} AM "telegraphing"
[Juxta Position? ... AM numbers?/Clemons/Congressional Bane or?(letter) }I cannot say there should not be a debate, or a vote, or that it won't matter, but it is very important how the resolution is worded and if we can imagine congress krafting it?]
The President is not putting America's credibility at stake, he is staking out the credibility of International Law and Globalization. This is a far cry from the Bush Era "war" president and unifier.**
Pre-title or heading: Rogers' Soap Box, might read "Pit Lip Schtick ".
Related: The Vatican, Steve Clemons, Steve Benen, Maddow Blog, [Boehner let her.]
8-30-13
From Thomas* Roberts, on Crisis in Syria: Re-Bolt On / Bring Em On [!]
(scroll click) Bay of Pit Bulls or Bay of Lip Schtick?
Wiping the Floors @ the UN[!]
* Italics reminder re:(un-bolds too)
** ibid[!]
(FP!)
(b.s.) read Make it so.
Bolt On: A. Toning Down the Lines. , B. Waiting for [Calm Cast] , C., D. Trick Question of the Day? , E.
Bring
Em On: a., b., c., {}D. Congress- - to boldly go... , E. Everything is on the Table! {Why not Hagel?}
{Will Obama declare the end of a war?/ Fix of war powers?}
*** (b.s.)
[(NOW) SOS Kerry]{..."standing on ceremony"}, }by Ghosh{, ^ un-telegraph/playbook
Clear segue: Secretary of State Kerry begins w/ my running notation
["read", un-Rumsfeld "know", smoking "social media", ^ }pinnacle of our perdicament{, "risk"/"do nothing","matters"..."know what we know", "respect" ... }general body/China-Russia-Arab signators/jury{ "ultimately".] close. [SOS]
Note: Quotation "marks" =Kerry comments, ^ marks= tangent to NOW, }{ = marks/highlites my comment/{urgency of now} AM "telegraphing"
[Juxta Position? ... AM numbers?/Clemons/Congressional Bane or?(letter) }I cannot say there should not be a debate, or a vote, or that it won't matter, but it is very important how the resolution is worded and if we can imagine congress krafting it?]
Friday, October 05, 2012
Replacement Refs or Not...
If it were a debate* we would have stopped it.
Not to pun on Xfinity, but while the Comcast links*** will expire.**,
it's the congress John! Bring it on, Joe! The President needs to hold a Sit Down.
Before I get down to the task of preserving<*> those links whether read or not, I will explain the Rogue John and Wax Leak of the asterisks. Although the lesson learned from "Simon says"^^ might be to actually read links more thoroughly, the lesson from the Debate may be more complex but parallel of sorts. By "rogue",<*> I mean that former Presidential Candidate McCain(first link) confesses an expectation for him lowering the expectations of Paul Ryan, while disrespecting the Vice President and framing an expectation for gaffs. Then in regard to the " ball of wax " that Palin leaks, it connects the "boys" to the other "race" speech.^^^ (There, that's the GPS-uncross-Rhodes.)
And a far as my Tan Gents(Dr. Trumps), being a Seahawk fan has nothing to do with my take on the moderator. Well, who knows? But Mr. Lerrer has been critcized for not moderating or having a good performance, but I think that given the style over substance versus substance with style, these are not legitimate debates. And within the political system (such as it is) it was not his job to interfere with the players being themselves in order to let them make the proper contrast. Again having only heard most of the debate on the radio, I thought that the President walked away with it, but that was under the condition that facts matter. Neither he nor Lehrer could have done a better job in the case that they don't.
BTW^: Speaking of "boys", we have heard cracks about the Harvard "professor" and I suspect he has had to deal with a few wise-guys or gulls[!]
*if the link were fact checked...ditto.
(McCain goes rogue.)(Palin leaks ball of wax .)
** not that I have read them yet or the recommend them.
***The point of this lede and the heading...
^ apologies to literary geeks for my style over elements.(But that was Core Knell.)
^^ added in edit mode
^^^ to be expanded later(but see lede and stupid...I mean congress and John, Joe & Ryan. i.e. the context of the politics of "relief' legislation.)
[In the spirit of medium...? ]
[Not to parse too acutely, but it is the medium and the mess age.]
(Bu' dump 'ump [!] ... )
Re:Ouch?(see FLASHNOTE)
Post-Subjectivism? Might it be, rational subjectivism?
<*> 10-7-12(See FLASHNOTE: under construction)
<*> 10-9-12 slight edit ( "r.... ",)
Not to pun on Xfinity, but while the Comcast links*** will expire.**,
it's the congress John! Bring it on, Joe! The President needs to hold a Sit Down.
Before I get down to the task of preserving<*> those links whether read or not, I will explain the Rogue John and Wax Leak of the asterisks. Although the lesson learned from "Simon says"^^ might be to actually read links more thoroughly, the lesson from the Debate may be more complex but parallel of sorts. By "rogue",<*> I mean that former Presidential Candidate McCain(first link) confesses an expectation for him lowering the expectations of Paul Ryan, while disrespecting the Vice President and framing an expectation for gaffs. Then in regard to the " ball of wax " that Palin leaks, it connects the "boys" to the other "race" speech.^^^ (There, that's the GPS-uncross-Rhodes.)
And a far as my Tan Gents(Dr. Trumps), being a Seahawk fan has nothing to do with my take on the moderator. Well, who knows? But Mr. Lerrer has been critcized for not moderating or having a good performance, but I think that given the style over substance versus substance with style, these are not legitimate debates. And within the political system (such as it is) it was not his job to interfere with the players being themselves in order to let them make the proper contrast. Again having only heard most of the debate on the radio, I thought that the President walked away with it, but that was under the condition that facts matter. Neither he nor Lehrer could have done a better job in the case that they don't.
BTW^: Speaking of "boys", we have heard cracks about the Harvard "professor" and I suspect he has had to deal with a few wise-guys or gulls[!]
*if the link were fact checked...ditto.
(McCain goes rogue.)(Palin leaks ball of wax .)
** not that I have read them yet or the recommend them.
***The point of this lede and the heading...
^ apologies to literary geeks for my style over elements.(But that was Core Knell.)
^^ added in edit mode
^^^ to be expanded later(but see lede and stupid...I mean congress and John, Joe & Ryan. i.e. the context of the politics of "relief' legislation.)
[In the spirit of medium...? ]
[Not to parse too acutely, but it is the medium and the mess age.]
(Bu' dump 'ump [!] ... )
Re:Ouch?(see FLASHNOTE)
Post-Subjectivism? Might it be, rational subjectivism?
<*> 10-7-12(See FLASHNOTE: under construction)
<*> 10-9-12 slight edit ( "r.... ",)
Sunday, July 08, 2012
Who Let the Dogs Out?
Original reaction: Not to Second Guess.
This idea coalesced from a Melissa Harris-Perry(*) panel and a Jared Bernstein reaction.
What irritated me was the piling on upon Mitt Romney. The second guessing was how Jared Bernstein discusses the context he was taken out of. As the panel on MH-P continued after her weigh-in on words via Barack Obama the segment on Word Police had nothing to do with my change, but everything to do with it; change and context and victim hoods. Not to mention "quote(s) from Nerdlandia" creeping into the X-change. (The hazzards of live blogging.***) I had no clue in the "footnote" controversy.** Am I falling for the spin, that Raw Money is a victim? Or do I forget my own theory of Share 'n Angle? Not too mention differences of intents[!]
* to be updated
** to be related later[!]
*** the alternative would be more awkward[!]
7-9-12 A Hunch Revisited as Obama prepares* to speak on extending part of Bush tax cuts.
[Segue/break: the "Dogs" above are "aTax dogs"; my subtle skirt of the issue.]
Regarding the president's speech, here are my rough notes: Jobs.. core mission... rebuilding economy...stalemate...choice two views. Top down- wrong...typical middle class tax cuts $3600... repeat $3600 Obama midle class tax cuts... for sake of misinformation. We tried, slowest job growth, falling income, rising deficits... we can't afford more. [me: we 1/2 tried more or other way]. People are with him, cut small business taxes 18 times, for 97% of them. We should agree to do what we agree on! [poor 1%, 2% 3%] One year extention for under $250K then we can debate the rest and act or wait till after the election. You are the ones driving the economy. Learn lessons of the past, build foundation for the future.
* speech here[Note that links for "A Hunch Revisited" were contemporary, not later insertions. Referencing democracy and choices of direction.]
[Andrea Mitchell follow-up here: "fiscal cliff"?** and tug of misinfo! Deficit distraction or key?]
[Bingo was his dog! NewsNation "big tent" not to mention simple math from idiots. I'm sorry, but math is where the numbers lie. It is math warfare. But I digress. Well,* not exactly ! ** And pardon my pun but Swiss Romney Knife?]
** bit of a cycle/anachronism here*** regarding insertion of links & today's asterisks.(I may not have the right fiscal cliff clip but neither does the math add up for AM or RNC. Re:Bingo and math of the dog carrier or station waggin')
*** (rather here **) HW B? (SK re/v SE: 5:25 HW Harvy Weinstein)
[OW to Act?]
[Bingo too point OH! (see poor 1%, 2%, 3%: LR RL)]
(Anachronistically where does MB fit in here ? i.e. I can' remember where Luke Russert was nailed down. But I think it was Martin Bashir who was asking about the 1, 2 or 3% and the previous sequence w/links does hit the nail on the understanding or aTAX jobs.)
[Hardball: David Corn to Smerconish "Sin of making sense". Then Bob's your uncle. It certainly rots at the head. MM Marshalling Message ?]
This idea coalesced from a Melissa Harris-Perry(*) panel and a Jared Bernstein reaction.
What irritated me was the piling on upon Mitt Romney. The second guessing was how Jared Bernstein discusses the context he was taken out of. As the panel on MH-P continued after her weigh-in on words via Barack Obama the segment on Word Police had nothing to do with my change, but everything to do with it; change and context and victim hoods. Not to mention "quote(s) from Nerdlandia" creeping into the X-change. (The hazzards of live blogging.***) I had no clue in the "footnote" controversy.** Am I falling for the spin, that Raw Money is a victim? Or do I forget my own theory of Share 'n Angle? Not too mention differences of intents[!]
* to be updated
** to be related later[!]
*** the alternative would be more awkward[!]
7-9-12 A Hunch Revisited as Obama prepares* to speak on extending part of Bush tax cuts.
[Segue/break: the "Dogs" above are "aTax dogs"; my subtle skirt of the issue.]
Regarding the president's speech, here are my rough notes: Jobs.. core mission... rebuilding economy...stalemate...choice two views. Top down- wrong...typical middle class tax cuts $3600... repeat $3600 Obama midle class tax cuts... for sake of misinformation. We tried, slowest job growth, falling income, rising deficits... we can't afford more. [me: we 1/2 tried more or other way]. People are with him, cut small business taxes 18 times, for 97% of them. We should agree to do what we agree on! [poor 1%, 2% 3%] One year extention for under $250K then we can debate the rest and act or wait till after the election. You are the ones driving the economy. Learn lessons of the past, build foundation for the future.
* speech here[Note that links for "A Hunch Revisited" were contemporary, not later insertions. Referencing democracy and choices of direction.]
[Andrea Mitchell follow-up here: "fiscal cliff"?** and tug of misinfo! Deficit distraction or key?]
[Bingo was his dog! NewsNation "big tent" not to mention simple math from idiots. I'm sorry, but math is where the numbers lie. It is math warfare. But I digress. Well,* not exactly ! ** And pardon my pun but Swiss Romney Knife?]
** bit of a cycle/anachronism here*** regarding insertion of links & today's asterisks.(I may not have the right fiscal cliff clip but neither does the math add up for AM or RNC. Re:Bingo and math of the dog carrier or station waggin')
*** (rather here **) HW B? (SK re/v SE: 5:25 HW Harvy Weinstein)
[OW to Act?]
[Bingo too point OH! (see poor 1%, 2%, 3%: LR RL)]
(Anachronistically where does MB fit in here ? i.e. I can' remember where Luke Russert was nailed down. But I think it was Martin Bashir who was asking about the 1, 2 or 3% and the previous sequence w/links does hit the nail on the understanding or aTAX jobs.)
[Hardball: David Corn to Smerconish "Sin of making sense". Then Bob's your uncle. It certainly rots at the head. MM Marshalling Message ?]
Thursday, June 21, 2012
Smirking Gun[!]
OK, I won't overuse the term smoking gun, but when I heard Senator McCain's leak theory, I knew something was up. "The only conceivable" reason that McCain knows the "motive for such damaging and compromising leaks" is that it is something he could conceive of doing. The Issa cover-up committee is along the same track. Worse than Watergate, less than WMD***.
September 11th occurred because the Bush administration had contempt for the Clinton administration and refused to carry on in the case against terrorism. Fast and Furious is still under investigation, but it seems that the political case is of the opposite extreme. The Obama administration not changing more from the previous administration.
I have a feeling that the Issa Committee investigation is actually an attempt to interfere with the Obama administration* of justice and foreign policy. Or retribution for Watergate, Iran Contra and Plame combined, or Republican power** as usual.
* Ctrl F "obstructionism"
** now that is the ticket or subpoena(Thom Hartmann)
*** 6-22-12 Pre-Post-or-us?
(I was reticent to use 9/11, especially with the smoking[!] gun lede-in. While Representative Mica is really stretching things, two things are certain. September 11th or even a dead ATF agent are nothing to smirk about, and Representative Issa hides his smirk with a snear.)
[Related posts: Re:investigation, Re:dribble, Re-course, Re:turn(Ctrl F "sabotage" "pate")]
[GPS for MSNBC labels?]
[!] really sic, i.e. no typo, nor disrespect for the departed intended
[A caller to the Ed Schultz show noted a similar theme. Republicans are more about obstruction politics than finding the facts. They must have something to hide. Obama's success and their incompetence. But then there followed**2 on Thom Hartmann the PE/FDR/BS [!]]
[It is on !]
[A friend asked my opinion on the wikileaks deal. Well more specifically the personalities involved. Bottomline, I don't feel that military personel should take it on themselve to leak top secret information without considering the consequences, nor should they have been distributed without the same considerations. Unfortunately there may not be enough law on the books to prosecute the latter although there certainly is for the former. Who do we have to blame for the laws on the books? Congress. Who do we have for not enough laws on the books? Republicans. Well, it is not the quantity but the quality. But the answer is the same. Talk is cheap, but actions*2 cost.]
*2 accidental link
[Weird link of the day.]
**2 with all due respect for B.S. it was the PE crack by FDR (Privileged Enterprise)
[Not so weird link of day.]
September 11th occurred because the Bush administration had contempt for the Clinton administration and refused to carry on in the case against terrorism. Fast and Furious is still under investigation, but it seems that the political case is of the opposite extreme. The Obama administration not changing more from the previous administration.
I have a feeling that the Issa Committee investigation is actually an attempt to interfere with the Obama administration* of justice and foreign policy. Or retribution for Watergate, Iran Contra and Plame combined, or Republican power** as usual.
* Ctrl F "obstructionism"
** now that is the ticket or subpoena(Thom Hartmann)
*** 6-22-12 Pre-Post-or-us?
(I was reticent to use 9/11, especially with the smoking[!] gun lede-in. While Representative Mica is really stretching things, two things are certain. September 11th or even a dead ATF agent are nothing to smirk about, and Representative Issa hides his smirk with a snear.)
[Related posts: Re:investigation, Re:dribble, Re-course, Re:turn(Ctrl F "sabotage" "pate")]
[GPS for MSNBC labels?]
[!] really sic, i.e. no typo, nor disrespect for the departed intended
[A caller to the Ed Schultz show noted a similar theme. Republicans are more about obstruction politics than finding the facts. They must have something to hide. Obama's success and their incompetence. But then there followed**2 on Thom Hartmann the PE/FDR/BS [!]]
[It is on !]
[A friend asked my opinion on the wikileaks deal. Well more specifically the personalities involved. Bottomline, I don't feel that military personel should take it on themselve to leak top secret information without considering the consequences, nor should they have been distributed without the same considerations. Unfortunately there may not be enough law on the books to prosecute the latter although there certainly is for the former. Who do we have to blame for the laws on the books? Congress. Who do we have for not enough laws on the books? Republicans. Well, it is not the quantity but the quality. But the answer is the same. Talk is cheap, but actions*2 cost.]
*2 accidental link
[Weird link of the day.]
**2 with all due respect for B.S. it was the PE crack by FDR (Privileged Enterprise)
[Not so weird link of day.]
Monday, May 07, 2012
First Sources
It is a beautiful Monday, Stephanie Miller is on the radio. France attempts a turn from austerity.^^
[Really... Click on in"F"ables(see**) at your own risk.]
Guest Eric Boehler of Media Matters and other* in"F"ables.**
President Obama takes his gloves off*** and Ron Paul is another matter.
Not[!][?]
*killing 2brds with one asterisk (the "other" link has nothing to do with Stephanie Miller)
But the next link is not for the Right thinking.
** More than you might want to hear by LiveFree Funny or Die.
Scroll over for insufficient warning.
*** First Read (two videos) Framing 2012
Note [?] @Not[!] = Churned Media
[Winning? Backward? Mitt-Flop ? (see two videos ***)]
[Not^ the bottom line! (see comments/hints)NFRY]
^confidence fairies ?
[Not such a large leap?!] Knot! Really it is.
^^ L8 link
Update: 5-8-12 Martin Bashir
Ed Schultz on Mitt Flop [!][?] Really! Really? And Lastly.
5-9-12 Charles Johnson
One person's Mitt-Flop ~ is another's Physics~ of Nuance.
~ Duality / Noncausality
[Really... Click on in"F"ables(see**) at your own risk.]
Guest Eric Boehler of Media Matters and other* in"F"ables.**
President Obama takes his gloves off*** and Ron Paul is another matter.
Not[!][?]
*killing 2brds with one asterisk (the "other" link has nothing to do with Stephanie Miller)
But the next link is not for the Right thinking.
** More than you might want to hear by Live
Scroll over for insufficient warning.
*** First Read (two videos) Framing 2012
Note [?] @Not[!] = Churned Media
[Winning? Backward? Mitt-Flop ? (see two videos ***)]
[Not^ the bottom line! (see comments/hints)NFRY]
^confidence fairies ?
^^ L8 link
Update: 5-8-12 Martin Bashir
Ed Schultz on Mitt Flop [!][?] Really! Really? And Lastly.
5-9-12 Charles Johnson
One person's Mitt-Flop ~ is another's Physics~ of Nuance.
~ Duality / Noncausality
Friday, August 05, 2011
Bleep 'n Compromise (Dept Ceiling) Review**
Not to be prophetic, but "I told you so."
In particular in The Jig is Up? and Bleep 'n Compromise,
but more importantly under Respected Sources.
IMHO: Randi Rhodes and Lawrence O'Donnell are radio and TV's number one(respectively) explainers* of the Obama Administration. Here are two Debt Ceiling recaps from Randi Rhodes which are nothing compared to hearing her.(AM 1090 Forum )
*respectfully
** which is not the same as bleepin'
(See Bleep & Compromise)
[Related Links and Nets or Roots & branches.]
[I wish I could unembed a little more plain language from this post, but maybe a counter example might do. With a do nothing congress***, the best thing to do is to kick the can down the road for political purposes.
*** or more accurately an undo-everything-House
edited (bold and spacing only)
[On the other hand: No Labels(slash)New Party
More musing: architect, archetype / archespectral, archiflightese]
[Speaking of hooks or hoofs? Read Herring?]
John Deering
In particular in The Jig is Up? and Bleep 'n Compromise,
but more importantly under Respected Sources.
IMHO: Randi Rhodes and Lawrence O'Donnell are radio and TV's number one(respectively) explainers* of the Obama Administration. Here are two Debt Ceiling recaps from Randi Rhodes which are nothing compared to hearing her.(AM 1090 Forum )
*respectfully
** which is not the same as bleepin'
(See Bleep & Compromise)
[Related Links and Nets or Roots & branches.]
[I wish I could unembed a little more plain language from this post, but maybe a counter example might do. With a do nothing congress***, the best thing to do is to kick the can down the road for political purposes.
*** or more accurately an undo-everything-House
edited (bold and spacing only)
[On the other hand: No Labels(slash)New Party
More musing: architect, archetype / archespectral, archiflightese]
[Speaking of hooks or hoofs? Read Herring?]
John Deering
Tuesday, July 05, 2011
Tall Ebb and Try Pod.
Taleb and Tri-pod.
Bingo: Hint scroll over
[Footnote: another Try Pod]
[If some have problems with the President, how would they handle even more heat from the kitchen.]
[For later digging: Clams or C-shells...but my original intent was in the context of the Halperin/Evans political/media calculus or shore.]
[7-6-11 Follow-up: Rachel Maddow*, Chris Matthews**, Chris Hayes***, Last Word?*4. Not Quite. Tax & Spend R.I.P.* 3:25 and 11:00 economic brick, Rube Goldberg(Frank Rich)
** Sen. McCaskill Joan Walsh
*** David Frum, Eugene Robinson (& David Brooks)
*4 Do Nothing Congress]
Bingo: Hint scroll over
[Footnote: another Try Pod]
[If some have problems with the President, how would they handle even more heat from the kitchen.]
[For later digging: Clams or C-shells...but my original intent was in the context of the Halperin/Evans political/media calculus or shore.]
[7-6-11 Follow-up: Rachel Maddow*, Chris Matthews**, Chris Hayes***, Last Word?*4. Not Quite. Tax & Spend R.I.P.* 3:25 and 11:00 economic brick, Rube Goldberg(Frank Rich)
** Sen. McCaskill Joan Walsh
*** David Frum, Eugene Robinson (& David Brooks)
*4 Do Nothing Congress]
Monday, May 09, 2011
Temporal
Problematics
Rachell Maddow: more than just a perspective. Facts do change with time. Past facts are still past, but present facts will soon be. Not to pun on what will be, but Osama bin Laden's past was really not so much the issue. Nothing will change* the mishandling of facts and choices made by the Bush administration. (By this I mean the importance of not having focused on getting bin Laden when the Taliban made offers asking for evidence before September 11th, 2001)
*actually congress can change and the presidency did (see "hypocrisy" and "flip-flop" under can change link)]
[Dylan Ratigan: Mega Fatwah.The difference* between opinion and ruling.
[Speaking of timing, I mean Dylan. It is alsmost as if, I had already read these. Not. Actually I have read the last link here, before this Temporal rant, but the rest of the links in this bracket are yet to be read, yet seem to fit the bill or fill the tetrahedron, and a prior intent, or rather a comment yet to be found. Note on timing thing: refers to monkey see monkey do of original intent, meaning an email going around about the psychology experiment(a seam in time with the Dylan cracks), and how some people think they know better.]
[Note bolds as read in balancing act or narrative of labels and perspectives. Noam Chomsky, Paul Krugman, No Labels, Herman Cain, not in context of "more than as if not to be".]
Rachell Maddow: more than just a perspective. Facts do change with time. Past facts are still past, but present facts will soon be. Not to pun on what will be, but Osama bin Laden's past was really not so much the issue. Nothing will change* the mishandling of facts and choices made by the Bush administration. (By this I mean the importance of not having focused on getting bin Laden when the Taliban made offers asking for evidence before September 11th, 2001)
*actually congress can change and the presidency did (see "hypocrisy" and "flip-flop" under can change link)]
[Dylan Ratigan: Mega Fatwah.The difference* between opinion and ruling.
A fatwā (Arabic: فتوى; plural fatāwā Arabic: فتاوى) in the Islamic faith is a religious opinion concerning Islamic law issued by an Islamic scholar. In Sunni Islam any fatwā is non-binding, whereas in Shia Islam it could be considered by an individual as binding, depending on his or her relation to the scholar. The person who issues a fatwā is called, in that respect, a Mufti, i.e. an issuer of fatwā, from the verb أَفْتَى 'aftā = "he gave a formal legal opinion on". This is not necessarily a formal position since most Muslims argue that anyone trained in Islamic law may give an opinion (fatwā) on its teachings. If a fatwā does not break new ground, then it is simply called a ruling.[1]*spirt and letter of the law]
An analogy might be made to the issue of legal opinions from courts in common-law systems. Fatwās generally contain the details of the scholar's reasoning, typically in response to a particular case, and are considered binding precedent by those Muslims who have bound themselves to that scholar, including future Muftis; mere rulings can be compared to memorandum opinions. The primary difference between common-law opinions and fatwās, however, is that fatwās are not universally binding; as the Sharia is not universally consistent and Islam is very non-hierarchical in structure, fatwās do not carry the sort of weight that secular common-law opinions do.
[Speaking of timing, I mean Dylan. It is alsmost as if, I had already read these. Not. Actually I have read the last link here, before this Temporal rant, but the rest of the links in this bracket are yet to be read, yet seem to fit the bill or fill the tetrahedron, and a prior intent, or rather a comment yet to be found. Note on timing thing: refers to monkey see monkey do of original intent, meaning an email going around about the psychology experiment(a seam in time with the Dylan cracks), and how some people think they know better.]
[Note bolds as read in balancing act or narrative of labels and perspectives. Noam Chomsky, Paul Krugman, No Labels, Herman Cain, not in context of "more than as if not to be".]
Tuesday, April 26, 2011
An Inconvenient Platonics?
Is Atlas Shrugged a satirical parable without intent?
Or an Inconvenient Platonics
or Ironic Pedagogy and Not So novel?
[Footnote in Ribble: Obamanomics]
[Slippery* Slope? Or Domino Theory? Ribble Two?]
[* Re: 3:45 and on of Ed]Premium Support or Voucher is not the problem, it is the "do nothing" red herrings that jump the shark. The blue print is a navigational chart, that just may be the teeter totter of politics. It is called a bailout(read welfare) for corporations. Speaking of rocking intent.]
[Try Corner Hat Trick?]
[Back Log of De Mos?]
[Blast from the Past?]
Or an Inconvenient Platonics
or Ironic Pedagogy and Not So novel?
[Footnote in Ribble: Obamanomics]
[Slippery* Slope? Or Domino Theory? Ribble Two?]
[* Re: 3:45 and on of Ed]Premium Support or Voucher is not the problem, it is the "do nothing" red herrings that jump the shark. The blue print is a navigational chart, that just may be the teeter totter of politics. It is called a bailout(read welfare) for corporations. Speaking of rocking intent.]
[Try Corner Hat Trick?]
[Back Log of De Mos?]
[Blast from the Past?]
Wednesday, January 19, 2011
How can one make light of a tragedy?
By looking for a silver lining. I think that is what we all want to do. We just have different perspectives on what preemptive is. But remember the silver lining requires a cloud and a light and it is always darkest before the dawn.(Not.)
My original trigger for this thought was a satire on the recent Seahawks loss in Chicago. But please note that my weapon of choice is words and I often have too full a tool box and grab the wrong instrument. But there is a difference between a target and a gun sight and I am sure that they meant surveyors or navigational equipment. Then there is the questionable use of a muzzle.
Back to Seattle: I feel I cost the Seahawks the game by not wearing my cap till the third quarter or so. But then maybe it was in the cards, or the hand of Chicago that was dealt. If these three downs aren't enough then Plato is a hail Mary and there is nothing wrong with the school of hard knocks.
Who let the dogs out? Not Pavlov.
[As for questionable sources: here are some earliest comment.
And more recent.]
[Speaking of rhetorical change*... what about repeal of the Dole-Romney Healthy Deficit Reduction Act, aka Obamacare.]
*see recent link 29:20 and 38:20.
My original trigger for this thought was a satire on the recent Seahawks loss in Chicago. But please note that my weapon of choice is words and I often have too full a tool box and grab the wrong instrument. But there is a difference between a target and a gun sight and I am sure that they meant surveyors or navigational equipment. Then there is the questionable use of a muzzle.
Back to Seattle: I feel I cost the Seahawks the game by not wearing my cap till the third quarter or so. But then maybe it was in the cards, or the hand of Chicago that was dealt. If these three downs aren't enough then Plato is a hail Mary and there is nothing wrong with the school of hard knocks.
Who let the dogs out? Not Pavlov.
[As for questionable sources: here are some earliest comment.
And more recent.]
[Speaking of rhetorical change*... what about repeal of the Dole-Romney Healthy Deficit Reduction Act, aka Obamacare.]
*see recent link 29:20 and 38:20.
Tuesday, December 21, 2010
Solutions or
Six of one, or three fifths of an other?
The ruling is 3 to 2 and I am glad I did not preemptively jump on Al Franken's RSN. There has been an issue made by the right or libertarian about freedom's forces, but my point is that the FCC is about a broad spectrum(pun on airwaves) but what it isn't the Commerce Department may be. In this regard the acuteness,(pun on funny thing happened on way to the angle) has to do with what is not on cable may take cellular form, but it is all business. i.e. traditionally if not erroneously, the FCC is about the so-called "public airwaves" what was radio and television are on to other formats or providers. If they can do with out transmitting or satelites, it is one thing, but if they need right of ways for ground links another, then there is the commerce itself, and if they could just not need to cross state lines... If nothing else is clear it should be the complexity that arises from not just our constitution but readings, not that this or the articles necessarily are... but works in progress.
[Speaking of progress or update(not)or [un-Swift segue] here is a concern: Are Social Security payments really dependent on the debt limit being raised? My point is that it is an interesting wrinkle in the charge that Social Security is not part of the so-called debt crisis, but it may be very important in the form you lie of the new congress and the table, no matter who has set it. i.e. is it too late to de-bait(or rebate) the lock box or reinvent the mouse trap?]
The ruling is 3 to 2 and I am glad I did not preemptively jump on Al Franken's RSN. There has been an issue made by the right or libertarian about freedom's forces, but my point is that the FCC is about a broad spectrum(pun on airwaves) but what it isn't the Commerce Department may be. In this regard the acuteness,(pun on funny thing happened on way to the angle) has to do with what is not on cable may take cellular form, but it is all business. i.e. traditionally if not erroneously, the FCC is about the so-called "public airwaves" what was radio and television are on to other formats or providers. If they can do with out transmitting or satelites, it is one thing, but if they need right of ways for ground links another, then there is the commerce itself, and if they could just not need to cross state lines... If nothing else is clear it should be the complexity that arises from not just our constitution but readings, not that this or the articles necessarily are... but works in progress.
[Speaking of progress or update(not)or [un-Swift segue] here is a concern: Are Social Security payments really dependent on the debt limit being raised? My point is that it is an interesting wrinkle in the charge that Social Security is not part of the so-called debt crisis, but it may be very important in the form you lie of the new congress and the table, no matter who has set it. i.e. is it too late to de-bait(or rebate) the lock box or reinvent the mouse trap?]
Sunday, December 05, 2010
Re: Leads
Cat 'o 9 Tales V. Who let the dogs out!
This is a perfect follow up to the Mis Leeds.[*] Stop.
[I will begin at the end, which is very hard for a work in progress...or should I start at the top? Not? Leadership or Bottom Lines for the People? As for timing, Mis Leeds preceded Re: Leads. I will skip a story[*] in getting to the Leadership issue, many[*] actually[*], but I have covered now the Re: Leads and will now MoveOn to the Top Line(secondary leed) which was noted* on a page of a resolution as it was debated in its proper 4M. Speaking of Cap Locks, I wasn't, but my fingers do the talking and so does $M(**) sometimes. This could be a flip of the free press, or the Buck in media? Remembering this is a work in progress, and also anachronistic, or is nothing contemporary? Just what was the Resolution? To give Obama courage! There were touching speeches. So(now) I get to the top from the bottom. Go Tatupu!!!!!! Now that is current. Waterbirds(brackets/italics) aside...(The Seahawks just took the lead.) And by Jiminy they are playing the Panthers. Who knew? But back to the issue of cats. They are hard to hurd.. Democrats are a big tent, but there are at least two kinds of dawgs.[yellow and blue(**)] We may need to whip up our courage and yet the(whoo trip)the big picture(touchdown) takes a brush of the artists pallet[e]. Woof, woof!]
* literally sitting in the reorg meeting, before the resolution was passed and a suspension of the rules failed to amend it, I noted a rough form of these words, actually exactly but for the o'.[close enough for journalist work?]
{typo edit ed: who knows jack}
[** capitalization effect 4M= 4'em but $M= buck media and not 4us.]
Postgame W(R)ap: Tale of Two Haves?(PI) From down 0-14 to finishing 31-14 the Nader has been passed ***.
*** A Resolution Calling for Courage and Leadership now from President Obama and Democratic leadership in the House and Senate.
[updates 12-9-10]
[*] link added and other editing [1-17-12 embedded in his 12-9-10 update C-(sic) "ledes" is correct spelling sometimes punned as Mis-leads.]
[(**)] in editing I have added a few hints and corrected some grammar/punctuation, but I will note that I was blogging with the Seahawks game on, and should note speaking of color, the passing of Don Meredith, quarter back & color commentator. As a personal aside it feels kind of funny to have been in a class with Tatupu's dad.
{note 3rd [*] Tails Aside already updated note Presidential Cheer Leaders and the pun on Tails and Tales.}
This is a perfect follow up to the Mis Leeds.[*] Stop.
[I will begin at the end, which is very hard for a work in progress...or should I start at the top? Not? Leadership or Bottom Lines for the People? As for timing, Mis Leeds preceded Re: Leads. I will skip a story[*] in getting to the Leadership issue, many[*] actually[*], but I have covered now the Re: Leads and will now MoveOn to the Top Line(secondary leed) which was noted* on a page of a resolution as it was debated in its proper 4M. Speaking of Cap Locks, I wasn't, but my fingers do the talking and so does $M(**) sometimes. This could be a flip of the free press, or the Buck in media? Remembering this is a work in progress, and also anachronistic, or is nothing contemporary? Just what was the Resolution? To give Obama courage! There were touching speeches. So(now) I get to the top from the bottom. Go Tatupu!!!!!! Now that is current. Waterbirds(brackets/italics) aside...(The Seahawks just took the lead.) And by Jiminy they are playing the Panthers. Who knew? But back to the issue of cats. They are hard to hurd.. Democrats are a big tent, but there are at least two kinds of dawgs.[yellow and blue(**)] We may need to whip up our courage and yet the(whoo trip)the big picture(touchdown) takes a brush of the artists pallet[e]. Woof, woof!]
* literally sitting in the reorg meeting, before the resolution was passed and a suspension of the rules failed to amend it, I noted a rough form of these words, actually exactly but for the o'.[close enough for journalist work?]
{typo edit ed: who knows jack}
[** capitalization effect 4M= 4'em but $M= buck media and not 4us.]
Postgame W(R)ap: Tale of Two Haves?(PI) From down 0-14 to finishing 31-14 the Nader has been passed ***.
*** A Resolution Calling for Courage and Leadership now from President Obama and Democratic leadership in the House and Senate.
[updates 12-9-10]
[*] link added and other editing [1-17-12 embedded in his 12-9-10 update C-(sic) "ledes" is correct spelling sometimes punned as Mis-leads.]
[(**)] in editing I have added a few hints and corrected some grammar/punctuation, but I will note that I was blogging with the Seahawks game on, and should note speaking of color, the passing of Don Meredith, quarter back & color commentator. As a personal aside it feels kind of funny to have been in a class with Tatupu's dad.
{note 3rd [*] Tails Aside already updated note Presidential Cheer Leaders and the pun on Tails and Tales.}
Wednesday, November 03, 2010
StandUp
This is a wisecrack.
[Actually I did not have the link in mind when I started this post, but unlike many I insert, I have read it completely. I had also previously been wondering why Paul Krugman does not have more influence. I think it is because he does not talk down to his readers, and if he does, the rest of his message is not understood. Not to continue some word play on the letter T, but timing is sometimes everything. Well, nothing is ever everything, but it is always a part of change and existence. So in this case, I suggest that another Key is Obama. Just like the Laugher Curve and one could say that it is more about location, (No Real Estate Pun), please read the above Paul Krugman column with timing, and location in mind. So...sides aside(Keynesian** is not Kenyan) keep in mind that change depends on both timing and location, not to mention that* in other areas***.
* time, location and changes(and our global relationships)
** not to vouch for wisegeek(or ads by google: i.e. Mises, or the Austrian School) let alone wikipedia [And not to emphasize government involvement, but more than just monetary and fiscal involvement.]
*** Field Theory
[Not to be a non-profit prophet, but what about the lameduck congress? And not just to pun, but what is the political calculus of the many bills pending from the House and chance for reconciliation.]
[And speaking of timing, Ed Schultz is not live, but he began his show saying you cannot build a party from the middle. Now by dropping his name I hope you have not tuned out, but I don't mean to agree with everything he says. He was saying this to both parties, or at least to me he was. Maybe he was saying it more to the Democrats, but it should be clear that whatever the Tea Party is, I doubt it is the middle, but it does depend on if you(we) are governing or running, and we should do the former.]
[Actually I did not have the link in mind when I started this post, but unlike many I insert, I have read it completely. I had also previously been wondering why Paul Krugman does not have more influence. I think it is because he does not talk down to his readers, and if he does, the rest of his message is not understood. Not to continue some word play on the letter T, but timing is sometimes everything. Well, nothing is ever everything, but it is always a part of change and existence. So in this case, I suggest that another Key is Obama. Just like the Laugher Curve and one could say that it is more about location, (No Real Estate Pun), please read the above Paul Krugman column with timing, and location in mind. So...sides aside(Keynesian** is not Kenyan) keep in mind that change depends on both timing and location, not to mention that* in other areas***.
* time, location and changes(and our global relationships)
** not to vouch for wisegeek(or ads by google: i.e. Mises, or the Austrian School) let alone wikipedia [And not to emphasize government involvement, but more than just monetary and fiscal involvement.]
*** Field Theory
[Not to be a non-profit prophet, but what about the lameduck congress? And not just to pun, but what is the political calculus of the many bills pending from the House and chance for reconciliation.]
[And speaking of timing, Ed Schultz is not live, but he began his show saying you cannot build a party from the middle. Now by dropping his name I hope you have not tuned out, but I don't mean to agree with everything he says. He was saying this to both parties, or at least to me he was. Maybe he was saying it more to the Democrats, but it should be clear that whatever the Tea Party is, I doubt it is the middle, but it does depend on if you(we) are governing or running, and we should do the former.]
Tuesday, July 13, 2010
Lawyers and Politicians...
and Journalists Oh My!
The general loopiness is nothing new in my blog. Stepehen* Colbert piled on the sandwich metaphor "to infinity" recently, and I am in the midst of Through the Looking Glass(yes, on paper)and I do believe Dorothy's escapade was possibly ripped off from Alice's trips. Hence the lyin' and politics and bull market redux.
Ribble or theme?
[Nonetheless to reads. i.e. I won't count]
P.S. no pun on the Steve or Stephen
*[7-10-12 Type Oh! A-thru?(R) The Point: Colbert, Clemons, Benen, Kornacki, Oh my?]
The general loopiness is nothing new in my blog. Stepehen* Colbert piled on the sandwich metaphor "to infinity" recently, and I am in the midst of Through the Looking Glass(yes, on paper)and I do believe Dorothy's escapade was possibly ripped off from Alice's trips. Hence the lyin' and politics and bull market redux.
Ribble or theme?
[Nonetheless to reads. i.e. I won't count]
P.S. no pun on the Steve or Stephen
*[7-10-12 Type Oh! A-thru?(R) The Point: Colbert, Clemons, Benen, Kornacki, Oh my?]
Thursday, January 21, 2010
Progressive Break Fast
Campaign for America's Future.
The above link is a compendium of news, comments & hope for progress.
Meanwhile I have made a few comments w/minor corrections **,
but bring this up much as it is(was):
** see [*]& comment 2 there
*** the holding water bit is a play on the Hardball promo regarding Chris Matthews' style of argument, Waterloo, and his leaking all over the mirror Howard Dean holds up. But I really did not intend a restroom metaphor, and so it goes.
[Apologies for the anachronistic asterisks and shuffled links but Rachel Maddow's were not yet available and I wished to bring up a few points. Howard Fineman clarifies the fine men or Frank & Obamba not to mention the Governor in Rendell link. While the beast was the unicorn of 60 yet not meek Senator Stabinow, not to mention the Ouch of Geek Irony.]
[translation of apologies/index of links]
mirror: Matthews/Dean Hardball
beasts: Maddow/Stabinow unicorn filibuster
ouch moment: Maddow/parody of TeaDay
Fine Man: Maddow/Fineman Frank Obama
Governor: Maddow/Rendell
downe: Browne
Not to mention BTW: Ed Schultz/Huffington
Not: Schultz/Lanny Davis
Ed.:Schultz/Gibbs
And Countdown. Keith Olbermann/Gibbs et al.
Lawrence O'Donnell
Harpers/Gitmo
tasteless/Brown
Obama/promise?
The above link is a compendium of news, comments & hope for progress.
Meanwhile I have made a few comments w/minor corrections **,
but bring this up much as it is(was):
Does the Massachusetts vote mean that the House should pass the Senate Bill, or should they reject it?
My view is it should get a vote, up or down or side ways* meaning risking some changes, risking the filibuster. Then the Senate can up or down it, or break it up. Speaking of holding water or breaking a mirror.***
* just as Ed Shultz was unclear about the ping pong potential, this is as tricky a net in the parlaimentary procedures that would offer this option. (Reconciliation or Nuclear Option)[Adjusted snippets of original continued.] [Psst...(Rachell)Speaking of "mythical beasts"(...)at least Barney Frank got the mess-age(...){Ouch: Moment of Meek to Fine Man?} (and Governor Ed Rendell say and does go downe.)
BTW: It is Senator Reid, not House Speaker, Ed.(Take nothing from the order of these links than that I do not recall which has Ed confused on the Reid/Pelosi positions in the process but great coverage and dialogue.)
** see [*]& comment 2 there
*** the holding water bit is a play on the Hardball promo regarding Chris Matthews' style of argument, Waterloo, and his leaking all over the mirror Howard Dean holds up. But I really did not intend a restroom metaphor, and so it goes.
[Apologies for the anachronistic asterisks and shuffled links but Rachel Maddow's were not yet available and I wished to bring up a few points. Howard Fineman clarifies the fine men or Frank & Obamba not to mention the Governor in Rendell link. While the beast was the unicorn of 60 yet not meek Senator Stabinow, not to mention the Ouch of Geek Irony.]
[translation of apologies/index of links]
mirror: Matthews/Dean Hardball
beasts: Maddow/Stabinow unicorn filibuster
ouch moment: Maddow/parody of TeaDay
Fine Man: Maddow/Fineman Frank Obama
Governor: Maddow/Rendell
downe: Browne
Not to mention BTW: Ed Schultz/Huffington
Not: Schultz/Lanny Davis
Ed.:Schultz/Gibbs
And Countdown. Keith Olbermann/Gibbs et al.
Lawrence O'Donnell
Harpers/Gitmo
tasteless/Brown
Obama/promise?
Wednesday, January 20, 2010
Two Clever by One Third?
Or both ends against the middle?
Does the Massachusetts vote mean that the House should pass the Senate Bill, or should they reject it?
My view is it should get a vote, up or down or side ways* meaning risking some changes, risking the filibuster. Then the Senate can up or down it, or break it up. Speaking of holding water or breaking a mirror.
BTW: It is Senator Reid, not House Speaker, Ed.(Take nothing from the order of these links than that I do not recall which has Ed confused on the Reid/Pelosi positions in the process but great coverage and dialogue.)
* just as Ed Shultz was unclear about the ping pong potential this is as tricky a net, in the parlaimentary procedures that would offer this option. (Reconciliation or Nuclear Option) Up down before or after change, either now or in 2010. I would risk the now. I am unsure how the cloak filled rooms would navigate the choice. Could they pass a progressive bill and the Senate Bill and then let the Senate choose? But do not risk doing nothing and leveraging 2010. See Countdown Tonight 5, 4,... 1-20-2010.
[Psst...(Rachel) speaking of mythical beasts, I believe one of these links(Mathews) had Gibbs noting $4 billion or so in health care gains in the market today[*], although other reporting (Keith) shows a market loss overall, but at least Barney Frank got the mess- age. Hmmm?]{Ouch: Moment of Meek to Fine Man?} (and Governor Ed Rendell say and does go downe.)
[Psst...It should be kind of hard for "Republicans" to declare a win as that word is kind of absent from his website. The same almost goes for the "Democrats" taking any responsibility when it comes to party identification]
[*](1-21-10) possible anachronism,(see BTW: Ed(9:45).) at least anecdotal(different sectors, different days?)(See comment 2)
Does the Massachusetts vote mean that the House should pass the Senate Bill, or should they reject it?
My view is it should get a vote, up or down or side ways* meaning risking some changes, risking the filibuster. Then the Senate can up or down it, or break it up. Speaking of holding water or breaking a mirror.
BTW: It is Senator Reid, not House Speaker, Ed.(Take nothing from the order of these links than that I do not recall which has Ed confused on the Reid/Pelosi positions in the process but great coverage and dialogue.)
* just as Ed Shultz was unclear about the ping pong potential this is as tricky a net, in the parlaimentary procedures that would offer this option. (Reconciliation or Nuclear Option) Up down before or after change, either now or in 2010. I would risk the now. I am unsure how the cloak filled rooms would navigate the choice. Could they pass a progressive bill and the Senate Bill and then let the Senate choose? But do not risk doing nothing and leveraging 2010. See Countdown Tonight 5, 4,... 1-20-2010.
[Psst...(Rachel) speaking of mythical beasts, I believe one of these links(Mathews) had Gibbs noting $4 billion or so in health care gains in the market today[*], although other reporting (Keith) shows a market loss overall, but at least Barney Frank got the mess- age. Hmmm?]{Ouch: Moment of Meek to Fine Man?} (and Governor Ed Rendell say and does go downe.)
[Psst...It should be kind of hard for "Republicans" to declare a win as that word is kind of absent from his website. The same almost goes for the "Democrats" taking any responsibility when it comes to party identification]
[*](1-21-10) possible anachronism,(see BTW: Ed(9:45).) at least anecdotal(different sectors, different days?)(See comment 2)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)