Palmyra under siege?
Does it take a monuments men[?]*
* to be parsed or footnoted later.
Awkward segue: Bush v. Clinton /
Obama light or strong?
Bush III or Clinton II or ...
Change or Bane or...
Close enough for government work?
E rack and E Ron[!]
4mat / Existentialism.***
([?] Temporal [!])** /
Monuments? (Politics
is local?, Simon
says...)
[(take) Between
I rock and I ran..., Temporal ? ]
Pink Floyd (Us and Them)
**The Last Word?
Up-Date ?
*** T.
P. / Counter
Intelligence
Translation: Iraq was a mistake, Afghanistan was unneccessary...
It was not an intelligence failure, it was a figment of leadership and failure and element of leadership.
It was also a preemption of intelligence of an unprecedented nature.
It was an existential crisis, that was ignored.
The fork not taken?
fork: CONnecting the . . . dots?
not: Obama
With Drama, Clinton(Bill)
is full of B.S.
Showing posts sorted by date for query close enough for. Sort by relevance Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by date for query close enough for. Sort by relevance Show all posts
Wednesday, May 20, 2015
Friday, March 01, 2013
FOOTNOTES MARCH 2013
3-14-13 : interesting digs Six Links
(b.s.) "S.E.(vi)" A. (fn)FOR D... , B. i.e. S.E. (vi) edgy , C. ROW MAN #Sign [Numeral (i)].
(b.s.) "Six Sigma" A. No Frackin' Way (sc) ... E. Rocket Man?[!] ... I. Over Helming. (sc).
un M bed Ed (sc) ?[!] {?}
3-18-13: Not to leave it, or pun on SNL: nor love it. R we LOL in the same boat? As for Heading
*: dimentionalism(sic) -
lede : (b.s.)tetra+heed+run - A.,B.,C.,D.,G.,H.,I.
or : (b.s.) lede+or+ship - A., ... . N. Walking the Plank[!] (s.c.)
ship : (b.s.) share+n+angle -
? : (b.s.) tetrahedron of will -
focus : (b.s.) Hume A. Third Times a Charm. B. He said *a fowl*!
on : (b.s.) Hume+or+us / Humorism
Pythagorean : Pythagorean - A Place to Ponder
Socratic : Socratics. - (b.s.)Kant+Hegel
published today 3-18-13
3-20-13 Curve Balls? (b.s.)Curve+Balls: A., B., C., D. / Original Intent and Spin.
3-22-13 Scroll over, and only "Physics" had been read at time of post. Post Physics? / Un Try
Angles?
3-28-13 Absolut(ist)ly - "clothing" (b.s.)robin+hood: RawMoney Runnin', Genre Clash (sc), Fair and Balanced... (sc) / divide**: At what point is (pun and rap on justice/scales and founding docs) / "absolutist"(b.s.)absolutism : At what point is , Primary Boogeyman. / win or lose (b.s.)former(pop+culture): A.(sc), B., C., D., E., F., G., Slash Segue(sc), The Billy Club...(sc), A generous dia-Gnosis.(sc)., FAUX CULTIAN? (sc), Close Enough for(sc), Pluto, Plato, and the Pen Dull'em, M(m)., N(n), Pluto, Plato, and the Pen Dull'em, P., Q.(q). latter (b.s.)boogeyman: Primary Boogeyman, B., C., Bottom Line Update(sc), Juxta-Boogey (sc)
VFW:Virtue Freedom War? Rhetoric, Logic, Grammar ? [!]
(b.s.) "S.E.(vi)" A. (fn)FOR D... , B. i.e. S.E. (vi) edgy , C. ROW MAN #Sign [Numeral (i)].
(b.s.) "Six Sigma" A. No Frackin' Way (sc) ... E. Rocket Man?[!] ... I. Over Helming. (sc).
un M bed Ed (sc) ?[!] {?}
3-18-13: Not to leave it, or pun on SNL: nor love it. R we LOL in the same boat? As for Heading
*: dimentionalism(sic) -
lede : (b.s.)tetra+heed+run - A.,B.,C.,D.,G.,H.,I.
or : (b.s.) lede+or+ship - A., ... . N. Walking the Plank[!] (s.c.)
ship : (b.s.) share+n+angle -
? : (b.s.) tetrahedron of will -
focus : (b.s.) Hume A. Third Times a Charm. B. He said *a fowl*!
on : (b.s.) Hume+or+us / Humorism
Pythagorean : Pythagorean - A Place to Ponder
Socratic : Socratics. - (b.s.)Kant+Hegel
published today 3-18-13
3-20-13 Curve Balls? (b.s.)Curve+Balls: A., B., C., D. / Original Intent and Spin.
3-22-13 Scroll over, and only "Physics" had been read at time of post. Post Physics? / Un Try
Angles?
3-28-13 Absolut(ist)ly - "clothing" (b.s.)robin+hood: RawMoney Runnin', Genre Clash (sc), Fair and Balanced... (sc) / divide**: At what point is (pun and rap on justice/scales and founding docs) / "absolutist"(b.s.)absolutism : At what point is , Primary Boogeyman. / win or lose (b.s.)former(pop+culture): A.(sc), B., C., D., E., F., G., Slash Segue(sc), The Billy Club...(sc), A generous dia-Gnosis.(sc)., FAUX CULTIAN? (sc), Close Enough for(sc), Pluto, Plato, and the Pen Dull'em, M(m)., N(n), Pluto, Plato, and the Pen Dull'em, P., Q.(q). latter (b.s.)boogeyman: Primary Boogeyman, B., C., Bottom Line Update(sc), Juxta-Boogey (sc)
VFW:Virtue Freedom War? Rhetoric, Logic, Grammar ? [!]
Friday, January 25, 2013
Try Lemmings
Trigger No Metrics!
If the pen is mightier than the sword, the keyboard is a bacteria*.* I will refrain from second guessing, wikipeddling or digging up my Genetics textbook. (It is close enough for government work.)
[Note: saved in draft as time stamped, but released @12:50 PM unedited**, linked or labeled.]
** not to drag lemmings in, only the "Political Calculus" or "cultural calculus" and share n' angle'n.
Sunday, October 14, 2012
Tuesday, September 04, 2012
Out Foxed?
Obtuseness Redux.
Why does Social Security Need 174,000 bullets?
Dems open convention playing defense of Obama.
Get the lede out?
Not to bury any ironies or unintended puns...
The first two links are referenced in the next two lines.
The third line and two links are in regard to the heading, and to the sources.
The "Obtuseness Redux" were from Comcast/AP.
But I first went local then tan gent or BaneOr BainOr...
the punchline has to do with they nature of Infowars(the site), a bit more journalistic and fair and balanced than FOX, not that they do not require very careful reads. The four links seem to represent a sort of unsorting and GPS un-crossroads dynamic. And for my part, the first aspect has to do with the irony of any whining about Social Security having an Inspector General division that hunts down fraud, in this age of second amendment fruit salad or T-parties. And for the sake of any intelligence briefs or geeks, "lede" is a journalistic term not a bullet point. The last two links are a good un-cross Rhodes* of the left. Not quite Tin-Foil Hats, not quite Coffee Party, but maybe close enough. (4 hard work?)
* not exactly
** ibid?
(See Labels, but I note here the original four:
DNC Convention, Infowars, Seattle PI, Social Security
(I know, [...] there is a local irony...)
[and global...]***
*** Re-verse asterisk of sorts. Emphasis on not read yet and irony. Heavy on the latter.
[For Rob Sake!]
[M-bed-ed? Actually...]
Why does Social Security Need 174,000 bullets?
Dems open convention playing defense of Obama.
Get the lede out?
Not to bury any ironies or unintended puns...
The first two links are referenced in the next two lines.
The third line and two links are in regard to the heading, and to the sources.
The "Obtuseness Redux" were from Comcast/AP.
But I first went local then tan gent or BaneOr BainOr...
the punchline has to do with they nature of Infowars(the site), a bit more journalistic and fair and balanced than FOX, not that they do not require very careful reads. The four links seem to represent a sort of unsorting and GPS un-crossroads dynamic. And for my part, the first aspect has to do with the irony of any whining about Social Security having an Inspector General division that hunts down fraud, in this age of second amendment fruit salad or T-parties. And for the sake of any intelligence briefs or geeks, "lede" is a journalistic term not a bullet point. The last two links are a good un-cross Rhodes* of the left. Not quite Tin-Foil Hats, not quite Coffee Party, but maybe close enough. (4 hard work?)
* not exactly
** ibid?
(See Labels, but I note here the original four:
DNC Convention, Infowars, Seattle PI, Social Security
(I know, [...] there is a local irony...)
[and global...]***
*** Re-verse asterisk of sorts. Emphasis on not read yet and irony. Heavy on the latter.
[For Rob Sake!]
[M-bed-ed? Actually...]
Wednesday, July 25, 2012
Fear and Running
in the Republican Party.
It could be said that the 1st Amendment of the constitution kills more than the 2nd Amendment.
Amendment 1- Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Amendment 2- A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
I was going to go with "gunning" instead of "running", but I did not want it to suggest* a 2nd Amendment solution. But with Romney running on an ad that misunderstands English, that is only one bullet point to my argument. "You didn't build that." is completely out of context**. But out of context does not necessarily mean misleading.***
Post asterisks: The impact of the first amendment on what gets done has more impact on life and death than the fallacy that anyone is going to kill the second amendment.[**]
* b.s. (blog search) to be footnoted
** (no pun on con text but I need to replace[*] the Daily Rundown links)
*** not to suggest (not exactly)
[*] close enough for blog work
[**] There are very constitutional reasons for the political calculus of this rhetoric to influence and create reality. But from another dimention, NorMan GoldMan has a rhetorical rant (not not it) that could fit Romney's rhetorical style in a silly Obama ad that could decimate [***] the Romney race.
[***] Pardon the Palin term, but not her.
[Post bracketed asterisks: regarding the NG rant, "that" is not quite "it" but on target, in more ways than one. But in appreciation of the nature of our progress, it is not about any new legislation. It is not about obliterating the constitution or its amendments or even new amendments. Old taxes and legislation are always on the table, for all three branches of government, and the people are the deciders. C-heading and lede!]
[Follow-up of sorts. But first a note on "gunning" as a rhetorical term. I'm sorry I can't give proper credit, but it may be embedded in the links above. However, Lawrence O'Donnell, noting the Brian Williams interview of Romney was not my original follow-up, but may be on target (That is not a course.) Ouch. Guns don't kill people, people do. Find them(Ctrl F)? What about the law? Not for the silly season, or gatlin salad? And oh no, not atTax of the meta4rhetoric. I really think there is a problem with the use of Senator Thelma for Patty Murray, since she puts Boehnor at the wheel.]
[Transparency Destroyed?]
[Re-sorts of sorts... sort of, or not, of course. This was basically an exercise in logging some clips of some MSNBC shows.]
[My best to Wendy & Ed Schultz!]
[7-26-12: update and effect (label)]
[Scroll up to "Post bracketed"]
It could be said that the 1st Amendment of the constitution kills more than the 2nd Amendment.
Amendment 1- Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Amendment 2- A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
I was going to go with "gunning" instead of "running", but I did not want it to suggest* a 2nd Amendment solution. But with Romney running on an ad that misunderstands English, that is only one bullet point to my argument. "You didn't build that." is completely out of context**. But out of context does not necessarily mean misleading.***
Post asterisks: The impact of the first amendment on what gets done has more impact on life and death than the fallacy that anyone is going to kill the second amendment.[**]
* b.s. (blog search) to be footnoted
** (no pun on con text but I need to replace[*] the Daily Rundown links)
*** not to suggest (not exactly)
[*] close enough for blog work
[**] There are very constitutional reasons for the political calculus of this rhetoric to influence and create reality. But from another dimention, NorMan GoldMan has a rhetorical rant (not not it) that could fit Romney's rhetorical style in a silly Obama ad that could decimate [***] the Romney race.
[***] Pardon the Palin term, but not her.
[Post bracketed asterisks: regarding the NG rant, "that" is not quite "it" but on target, in more ways than one. But in appreciation of the nature of our progress, it is not about any new legislation. It is not about obliterating the constitution or its amendments or even new amendments. Old taxes and legislation are always on the table, for all three branches of government, and the people are the deciders. C-heading and lede!]
[Follow-up of sorts. But first a note on "gunning" as a rhetorical term. I'm sorry I can't give proper credit, but it may be embedded in the links above. However, Lawrence O'Donnell, noting the Brian Williams interview of Romney was not my original follow-up, but may be on target (That is not a course.) Ouch. Guns don't kill people, people do. Find them(Ctrl F)? What about the law? Not for the silly season, or gatlin salad? And oh no, not atTax of the meta4rhetoric. I really think there is a problem with the use of Senator Thelma for Patty Murray, since she puts Boehnor at the wheel.]
[Transparency Destroyed?]
[Re-sorts of sorts... sort of, or not, of course. This was basically an exercise in logging some clips of some MSNBC shows.]
[My best to Wendy & Ed Schultz!]
[7-26-12: update and effect (label)]
[Scroll up to "Post bracketed"]
Monday, February 27, 2012
Frackin', Fudgin', Freakin', In-"F"-able[!]
Frackin'
Fudgin'
Freakin'
In-F-Able! -
Mitt,
Newt,
Ron,
Rick.
Not exactly a cross word, ribble or ineffable...
But by George, close enough for G work.
http://political_progress_for_people.blogspot.com/search?q=close+enough+for
http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2010/04/24/93492/steve-king-repeal-uncertainty/
[Speaking of ineffable...($F=G works) see previous post, Re:mouse and image/edit problems, not to 4close the word or scroll, over.]
[Please note that an anamoly has been cured. Which I hope to mention later...or knot[!]]
http://political_progress_for_people.blogspot.com/2012/02/saint-or-um.html
http://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=311251275598904&id=100000176362685#!/permalink.php?story_fbid=371162076234764&id=100000176362685
Fudgin'
Freakin'
In-F-Able! -
Mitt,
Newt,
Ron,
Rick.
Not exactly a cross word, ribble or ineffable...
But by George, close enough for G work.
http://political_progress_for_people.blogspot.com/search?q=close+enough+for
http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2010/04/24/93492/steve-king-repeal-uncertainty/
[Speaking of ineffable...($F=G works) see previous post, Re:mouse and image/edit problems, not to 4close the word or scroll, over.]
[Please note that an anamoly has been cured. Which I hope to mention later...or knot[!]]
http://political_progress_for_people.blogspot.com/2012/02/saint-or-um.html
http://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=311251275598904&id=100000176362685#!/permalink.php?story_fbid=371162076234764&id=100000176362685
Wednesday, December 14, 2011
Mission Accomplished
(AP photo see link)
A case of colors.
The Wall Street Journal is not necessarily the first source for Obama flag waving, but the lede is this: Obama Lauds Troops as Iraq War Winds Up. But under my ledership*, I must note that "Mr. Obama was careful not to declare victory." But Colonel Wilkerson and Rachel Maddow rally** my reasons for the lede here. "Hooah!"
* yes "ledership"(sic)
[link is leadership]
** link yet to be embedded (here)
[Speaking of battles and drafts, yet to be. (Ground Troops***)]
*** i.e. foot noted
[PEA CE OUT]
12-15-11 [*] "Hooha!" Not Exactly,
but close enough[!] (for gov'meant work)
[Nor black and white, but here are four perspectives. This is a deeply embedded line. It is about working together and leadership, not without ledership. The gist of it is in regards to the process of crafting good documents(let alone with imperfect people). As in what the heck is Obama doing, let alone Ron Wyden, or Rand Paul.(or Keynes/Hayek) The most important ingredient in these threads is the people, their understanding, and elections that matter. Issues bring the people to the table, and the ballot box.]
[No Horsing around.]
[*]Well maybe a little horsing around. But with respect to follow-up to Awkward Segue, and "four perspectives"(text today) I note that Norman Goldman addresses the NDAA, and was looking forward to Randy Rhodes giving her perspective, but David Sirota was sitting in.]
Tuesday, November 22, 2011
Sunday, October 02, 2011
Retro-Gate
Iran-Contra, WMD, October No-Surprise.
Not to preemptively prophet[!]
Not to bring back the draft,
but here are some posts held in draft.
Update: Muffin Gate: Miff In Gate
Pulled from draft today!
[Oops, a bit redundant]
Great Ledership
It's Mad[!]
[!] = sarcasm / spelling as intended = [sp!]
Close enough for journal work?
[10-3-11 Just to be clear, I believe in nuance and the law, but as different fields. What I can't say is that I am clearly satire, but the field might be mis-ledership***. But not to coin a new field, here are some other* perspectives, not to say they are the same field. (two video, two scroll overs)
*after the break: Stewart on NRA / teaching** to the test? NOT!]
** speaking of headings*** or retro
*** footnote to clarify later:
moral economics(INET/Robert Reich)& even later
BTW: sub-heading(Just to be clear...) I did not mean to wind-up a G'Ribble, but you can't judge a target by its aim, fear-mongers need a boogie-man. Aims are directions not bulls-eyes.
Definition: G'Ribble- grand ribbing and riddle
[*4] Ratigan and Perugia: processes
Not to preemptively prophet[!]
Not to bring back the draft,
but here are some posts held in draft.
Update: Muffin Gate: Miff In Gate
Pulled from draft today!
[Oops, a bit redundant]
Great Ledership
It's Mad[!]
[!] = sarcasm / spelling as intended = [sp!]
Close enough for journal work?
[10-3-11 Just to be clear, I believe in nuance and the law, but as different fields. What I can't say is that I am clearly satire, but the field might be mis-ledership***. But not to coin a new field, here are some other* perspectives, not to say they are the same field. (two video, two scroll overs)
*after the break: Stewart on NRA / teaching** to the test? NOT!]
** speaking of headings*** or retro
*** footnote to clarify later:
moral economics(INET/Robert Reich)& even later
BTW: sub-heading(Just to be clear...) I did not mean to wind-up a G'Ribble, but you can't judge a target by its aim, fear-mongers need a boogie-man. Aims are directions not bulls-eyes.
Definition: G'Ribble- grand ribbing and riddle
[*4] Ratigan and Perugia: processes
Tuesday, June 28, 2011
High8US
[7-6-11 links added]
(continued)
In ConText:
Over Helming.
Underwhelmed?
HiAteUS
Humpty Dumpty...
Ideology
Connecting the Dots
Way, Too Point Oh?
Way[!]
No Frackin' Way
Image Processing
Re:Verb
'nuff said
Ledership[!]
Antithesis of Nuance
Related sites:
Finance and Mandelbrot
Reader Supported News
Instutute for New Economic Thinking (Flip-flop and Obliquity)
The New Yorker*
The Economist
YouTube
Calm Pend I um? (or E'em)
*Footnote: Thank Finance and Mandelbrot for The New Yorker and The Economist links [also: errors(not fully read yet) and thank the Democrats for the YouTube.]
BTW: The above image and photo, did not turn out(inserted) as intended, not that there is anything wrong with that. (Sign Feld Pun )["Close enough for government work".[!] ]
[Writer's Almanac: KUOW, Natural Gas, Regenerating, Life After, Burning: Inslee and much More.]
(continued)
In ConText:
Over Helming.
Underwhelmed?
HiAteUS
Humpty Dumpty...
Ideology
Connecting the Dots
Way, Too Point Oh?
Way[!]
No Frackin' Way
Image Processing
Re:Verb
'nuff said
Ledership[!]
Antithesis of Nuance
Related sites:
Finance and Mandelbrot
Reader Supported News
Instutute for New Economic Thinking (Flip-flop and Obliquity)
The New Yorker*
The Economist
YouTube
Calm Pend I um? (or E'em)
*Footnote: Thank Finance and Mandelbrot for The New Yorker and The Economist links [also: errors(not fully read yet) and thank the Democrats for the YouTube.]
BTW: The above image and photo, did not turn out(inserted) as intended, not that there is anything wrong with that. (Sign Feld Pun )["Close enough for government work".[!] ]
[Writer's Almanac: KUOW, Natural Gas, Regenerating, Life After, Burning: Inslee and much More.]
Thursday, February 10, 2011
BLANK NETWORK
Dot Tool* to be named later. This is just a list of the Wills and Bills.
[Not Necessarily the News Guru, but divagation or not maybe linked.]
The Anti-Billy Club
The Club of Association
King of Rhetoric?
A Generous dia-Gnosis.
Report from Sabbatical
Sabbatical
This is not necessarily a Newshounds blog, Colbert Report or Daily Show.
I don't read or view things so you don't have to, sometimes you do, and sometimes just scrolling over may provide enough. It is divagation and stochastic at its best, or sometimes worst. But it is not just all about them or us. My Navigation label needs updating, and the Navigation II label is about our course, or a combination or demonstration of it.
While names are not the thing(and they are coming slowly today), there is value in comparing and contrasting, and sometimes associations matter. Leadership and representation matters, and in journalism there is the ledership which sometimes leads back to my point: our headings, navigation and having to follow for oneself. Part of the spirit of this has been diffused in all seriousness, by the focus on the list and the Bills and Wills, but it is more about the network and bringing things to the table. So while the banner or name for the effort is still pending, as well as more on the principles(The club of association) I will begin listing the inspirations for the columns or sides of the table.
* Blank Network (Anti-Billy Club: see links)
RESEARCH (So I am frackin' fudging a bit with the Will, the HasselB, and the Williams.)
Bill O'Reilly
George F. Will
Elizabeth HasselBECK
William Kristol
Walter Williams
William Safire
Willam F. Buckley
DEVELOPMENT
Bill Maher
Will Rogers
Bill Press
William Shakespeare
Similar Wills
Rush Limbaugh
Glenn Beck
Steve King
Sarah Palin
Michele Bachmann
Honorary Anti-Billy Clubs
Noam Chomsky
Thom Hartmann
Rachel Maddow
Jon Stewart
Steven Colbert
Lawrence O'Donnell
Norman Goldman
Ed Schultz
[Under-construction, italics are postumous honors. Apologies for the orders, they are at my whim or some consideration or other. It is not about heirarchy or honors, or just Bill O'Reilly and Bill Maher. And it may be asked, do some really want to be at the table? If they don't work well with others? That may play out as the list and the principles evolve.(Network Theory)]
[2-17-11 Update: Walk Like A Cheesehead. Wrap mine in tinfoil..PU! NOT! But close enough to government work.]
[Not Necessarily the News Guru, but divagation or not maybe linked.]
The Anti-Billy Club
The Club of Association
King of Rhetoric?
A Generous dia-Gnosis.
Report from Sabbatical
Sabbatical
This is not necessarily a Newshounds blog, Colbert Report or Daily Show.
I don't read or view things so you don't have to, sometimes you do, and sometimes just scrolling over may provide enough. It is divagation and stochastic at its best, or sometimes worst. But it is not just all about them or us. My Navigation label needs updating, and the Navigation II label is about our course, or a combination or demonstration of it.
While names are not the thing(and they are coming slowly today), there is value in comparing and contrasting, and sometimes associations matter. Leadership and representation matters, and in journalism there is the ledership which sometimes leads back to my point: our headings, navigation and having to follow for oneself. Part of the spirit of this has been diffused in all seriousness, by the focus on the list and the Bills and Wills, but it is more about the network and bringing things to the table. So while the banner or name for the effort is still pending, as well as more on the principles(The club of association) I will begin listing the inspirations for the columns or sides of the table.
* Blank Network (Anti-Billy Club: see links)
RESEARCH (So I am frackin' fudging a bit with the Will, the HasselB, and the Williams.)
Bill O'Reilly
George F. Will
Elizabeth HasselBECK
William Kristol
Walter Williams
William Safire
Willam F. Buckley
DEVELOPMENT
Bill Maher
Will Rogers
Bill Press
William Shakespeare
Similar Wills
Rush Limbaugh
Glenn Beck
Steve King
Sarah Palin
Michele Bachmann
Honorary Anti-Billy Clubs
Noam Chomsky
Thom Hartmann
Rachel Maddow
Jon Stewart
Steven Colbert
Lawrence O'Donnell
Norman Goldman
Ed Schultz
[Under-construction, italics are postumous honors. Apologies for the orders, they are at my whim or some consideration or other. It is not about heirarchy or honors, or just Bill O'Reilly and Bill Maher. And it may be asked, do some really want to be at the table? If they don't work well with others? That may play out as the list and the principles evolve.(Network Theory)]
[2-17-11 Update: Walk Like A Cheesehead. Wrap mine in tinfoil..PU! NOT! But close enough to government work.]
Tuesday, February 01, 2011
Random Points
[POST 2-8-11]
Running from Labels?
Who knows what whom didn't?
Belly Up to the Table.
Trust(HBO) but verify.
Redistribution of Wealth
Redistribution of Yikes
Redistribution of Genre
Less than random thought: What is Sarah Palin running for?
November 2011: The New Adventures of Regis and the Old Larry King? Queen of Truth and Balance. A cornerstone: "We should not stand for that, or with that or by that." FYIS: For Your Information Sarah - here are for whom knows started it.
BTW: My language is the victim to the hood of refudiation here. i.e. close enough for government work?
[Note: bottom link will always indicate previous post]
Running from Labels?
Who knows what whom didn't?
Belly Up to the Table.
Trust(HBO) but verify.
Redistribution of Wealth
Redistribution of Yikes
Redistribution of Genre
Less than random thought: What is Sarah Palin running for?
November 2011: The New Adventures of Regis and the Old Larry King? Queen of Truth and Balance. A cornerstone: "We should not stand for that, or with that or by that." FYIS: For Your Information Sarah - here are for whom knows started it.
BTW: My language is the victim to the hood of refudiation here. i.e. close enough for government work?
[Note: bottom link will always indicate previous post]
Tuesday, December 21, 2010
Obtuseness?
Robert Reich asks why are Democrats voting for Reaganomics?
Paul Craig Roberts suggests another spin on Reaganomics.
Is it the obtuseness of stagflation/inflation?
Is that like growing the pie, while each piece gets smaller?
No, it is like the pie not growing while costs do, and jobs go to pieces. Whew, I think I cut that close to home. But I do think that several of their points do intersect (actually lines do, but at points) but there could be another angle or perspective needed in the back and forth. Enough ge oh me trick ally pointed puns. It may take a third econonomic perspective or formulae to alter the give and take. At least it is not just about supply and demand, but employment and progress. But for whom?
[I did not mean to kill two birds with one stone, but yes I am often obtuse or have a cute angle on things. I may often have too big a picture(stone) or skip from one to another perspective(bird). But this toss is back to the concept of not all things being equal. Not just taxes, but debt and spending, in regards to alternate pies, perspectives or form you lie.]
[Potential Star Chamber? The other four points.]
[Breaking, a cuteness.]
Paul Craig Roberts suggests another spin on Reaganomics.
Is it the obtuseness of stagflation/inflation?
Is that like growing the pie, while each piece gets smaller?
No, it is like the pie not growing while costs do, and jobs go to pieces. Whew, I think I cut that close to home. But I do think that several of their points do intersect (actually lines do, but at points) but there could be another angle or perspective needed in the back and forth. Enough ge oh me trick ally pointed puns. It may take a third econonomic perspective or formulae to alter the give and take. At least it is not just about supply and demand, but employment and progress. But for whom?
[I did not mean to kill two birds with one stone, but yes I am often obtuse or have a cute angle on things. I may often have too big a picture(stone) or skip from one to another perspective(bird). But this toss is back to the concept of not all things being equal. Not just taxes, but debt and spending, in regards to alternate pies, perspectives or form you lie.]
[Potential Star Chamber? The other four points.]
[Breaking, a cuteness.]
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.}
Tuesday, November 30, 2010
Lives
(or jobs) in the balance.
[Amy Goodman found earlier]
Meanwhile on the jobs front(or tax cuts/stimulus) Republicans claim no data[**] on millionaire target. Close enough for government* work.
(hardball breaking: fight or switch)
*context for chart
[further breaking: and pesky fact (not included) Bush appointee]
[Matt Laur?]
** on the other hand
[Amy Goodman found earlier]
Meanwhile on the jobs front(or tax cuts/stimulus) Republicans claim no data[**] on millionaire target. Close enough for government* work.
(hardball breaking: fight or switch)*context for chart
[further breaking: and pesky fact (not included) Bush appointee]
[Matt Laur?]
** on the other hand
Tuesday, October 19, 2010
Debt and Tax Cuts,
debt and tax cuts,
go together like love and cha-nge...
you can't have one without the - other.
Well...not exactly but close enough for government work. BTW, what the heck does running a business have to do with running a government? Well one important feature is investment. While profit is not really the purpose of government, let alone the main point of any needs related services, let alone infrastructure, health care, education, insurance and banking.
Investment seems a basic feature that even those in business don't understand when it comes to their own tax situation. And when it comes to taxes cuts it is a no brainer that they increase debt. It is a fallacy that cutting taxes increase revenues. That only works on one side of the Laffer Curve not the other. i.e. it is a bell curve.
And apparently no means yes in some cirles, while apparently the tea party does not understand "taxation without representation". A prohibition of legislative change to an initiative means that what is not in the initiative can be in the future. But not without the legislature paying a price they do not want to pay now. In other words the only way to prevent the possibility of change is to takeaway the possibility of representation and politics to have an effect. When it comes to what is not in the ads or not on the table, it is as ridiculous(if not more so) to claim that supporters of I-1098 are not telling you it is an income tax, (5% over $200K for single/$400K for couples or 1% of the tax filers) as it is that the same ads don't mention a 20% reduction in state property taxes and an over 1000%* increase in the B&O TAX CREDIT which will bring the benefit to 80% of businesses.
* actually this is my calculation of $420 being raised to $4800
go together like love and cha-nge...
you can't have one without the - other.
Well...not exactly but close enough for government work. BTW, what the heck does running a business have to do with running a government? Well one important feature is investment. While profit is not really the purpose of government, let alone the main point of any needs related services, let alone infrastructure, health care, education, insurance and banking.
Investment seems a basic feature that even those in business don't understand when it comes to their own tax situation. And when it comes to taxes cuts it is a no brainer that they increase debt. It is a fallacy that cutting taxes increase revenues. That only works on one side of the Laffer Curve not the other. i.e. it is a bell curve.
And apparently no means yes in some cirles, while apparently the tea party does not understand "taxation without representation". A prohibition of legislative change to an initiative means that what is not in the initiative can be in the future. But not without the legislature paying a price they do not want to pay now. In other words the only way to prevent the possibility of change is to takeaway the possibility of representation and politics to have an effect. When it comes to what is not in the ads or not on the table, it is as ridiculous(if not more so) to claim that supporters of I-1098 are not telling you it is an income tax, (5% over $200K for single/$400K for couples or 1% of the tax filers) as it is that the same ads don't mention a 20% reduction in state property taxes and an over 1000%* increase in the B&O TAX CREDIT which will bring the benefit to 80% of businesses.
* actually this is my calculation of $420 being raised to $4800
Monday, October 18, 2010
Independent comment
Senatory Patty Murray and former state legilsatore Dino Rossi have held two debates of which I have heard more comment on than snippets. I could relate to the charge that the questions may have not been answered directly even though I fancy that I may have undestood one more than the other and if you think it is simple then that is the side that might be wrong. This is the perpsective I take from what has been exchanged in the ad campaigns. So if you haven't seen the debates keep that in mind, not that I am independent. My point is that there is a need to counter the so-called facts that come out as well as answer questions, while some of the answers are just plain incomplete. My reference to independent comment above refers to close to neutrality here but sympathy with one frustrated with the party representatives(or rather only a choice between the two), who incidentally was a libertarian with socialist understanding. I won't parse that but at least the individual had great scepticism for the so-called tea partiers, even though I find a libertarian socialist to be even more idealist if not a fantasy. On the other hand, while some want their cake and eat it too, there seems some extremity of balance(if not irony) in this combination.
[Cross Reference to be inserted but it has to do with fuzzy math and fuzzy language.]
[For those who think that they have to know better to vote, vote anyway*, at least there is a shot at cancelling a vote of someone that does not know better enough not to vote.]
* in some races the first link was neutral or gave dual endorsements, rely on this one and then the other to fill in if any questions.
[If the choice is between a Democrat or a Republican and that is usually it**, vote the Democrat as they can be counted on to be more flexible than the Republican. The time to influence them by sending a message was in the primary.]
** technically it is not the rule but the result that it still happens that way even though concievably the top-two could be of the same party, the political calculus or lemonade making does not work out that way, and third parties are even more in a pickle(I mean lemon.)
[Cross Reference to be inserted but it has to do with fuzzy math and fuzzy language.]
[For those who think that they have to know better to vote, vote anyway*, at least there is a shot at cancelling a vote of someone that does not know better enough not to vote.]
* in some races the first link was neutral or gave dual endorsements, rely on this one and then the other to fill in if any questions.
[If the choice is between a Democrat or a Republican and that is usually it**, vote the Democrat as they can be counted on to be more flexible than the Republican. The time to influence them by sending a message was in the primary.]
** technically it is not the rule but the result that it still happens that way even though concievably the top-two could be of the same party, the political calculus or lemonade making does not work out that way, and third parties are even more in a pickle(I mean lemon.)
Thursday, September 16, 2010
Aye of Newt
The Interpretation of Dreams*
Pre and post Freud.(Nietszche/Jung)***
Projection of terms/Slash/Tools.
The difference between ends and means seems lost.
Speaking of lost, find Armey's only regret is "calling for" government shutdown before doing it.(My original source was MSNBC, but haven't located it.)
Well? Close enough and speaking of intent...not exactly.**
But is that Alinsky, or both ends against the middle or "authentically dishonest"?
Footnote: This was originally intended to hold some comments for later research, but worked out in the end, excessive links aside.
Label: Post-Nietzschean-Manichean-Platonics.
[Original footnote:(LABEL aside)I was not aware of earlier uses of Aye of Newt.]
* [the two links inserted later]
** [exactly(Forbes/D'Sousa)]
***[4 links added]
QED?
[progressive/pragmatic verses purity/pragmatic = incremental no slippery slope]
[See Comment.]
[One Nation & The Plan]
Pre and post Freud.(Nietszche/Jung)***
Projection of terms/Slash/Tools.
The difference between ends and means seems lost.
Speaking of lost, find Armey's only regret is "calling for" government shutdown before doing it.(My original source was MSNBC, but haven't located it.)
Well? Close enough and speaking of intent...not exactly.**
But is that Alinsky, or both ends against the middle or "authentically dishonest"?
Footnote: This was originally intended to hold some comments for later research, but worked out in the end, excessive links aside.
Label: Post-Nietzschean-Manichean-Platonics.
[Original footnote:(LABEL aside)I was not aware of earlier uses of Aye of Newt.]
* [the two links inserted later]
** [exactly(Forbes/D'Sousa)]
***[4 links added]
QED?
[progressive/pragmatic verses purity/pragmatic = incremental no slippery slope]
[See Comment.]
[One Nation & The Plan]
Thursday, April 08, 2010
Close Enough for
Government Work?
The Leviathan.Not Exactly.
But well put.
The next small step?
Old style?
[I am unable to retrace the techo-cultural trip that landed me on the Ed Woods production but it was a tangent from Pop Culture entertainer Glenn Beck.]
The Leviathan.Not Exactly.
But well put.
The next small step?
Old style?
[I am unable to retrace the techo-cultural trip that landed me on the Ed Woods production but it was a tangent from Pop Culture entertainer Glenn Beck.]
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)