Direct two the Source.
My preemptive take on the Affirmative Action and Voting Rights rulings(1st two links) is which comes first the chicken of the egg? This is not taken from the links but other early interpretations. The key threat* of this feeling has to do with the former being sent back to the lower court and the latter being sent back to congress. I know this is not much of a take, but it may be that over-reach in reactions will mellow out. Without embedding** more sources, I think there is irony in the juxtaposition. In the former asking the lower court to determine if alternatives(to affirmative action)will reach desired results (of diversity). In the latter(much less is known at this point) imagine congress having a part addressing any change to a voting rights acts.
* The key thread spins on scientific principles of cause and effect.
**[Not that I will soon to be reading the links.]
[6-26-13: The Cycle- another formula ? ]
Showing posts sorted by date for query juxtaposition. Sort by relevance Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by date for query juxtaposition. Sort by relevance Show all posts
Tuesday, June 25, 2013
Friday, February 03, 2012
Social Darwinism?
Second Spin: There seems to be something "inconvenient" about this juxtaposition, which is hard to unspin. I know it stems from "survival of the fittest", but is that not the root of being social? Unsocial Darwinism would be no more convenient. But that doesn't stop some from evolving labels and name calling.
[Speaking of Creeping, not to ding Rachel Maddow, but note the Santorum, 3F. Invisible hand anyone? What would Adam Smith say about teachers, drug companies and whose job is what. Not to confuse Popping Culture with Pope Culture. ]
Monday, May 16, 2011
Calm Pend E Um
[slight word corrections on 9-28-11 but there was a coincidence that it is about lede or ship.]
Re: Friday the 13th.
Ally Gory of the Bubble.
On Friday after my posts, or it could have been Thursday, I was reflecting on the apparent synchronicity or was it anachronicity? Gotcha. Actually, I was reflecting more on my writing style or flow(hyperbole/hyperbola). Suffice to say, I was curious about the convenience of some of my searches when I would be in need of embedding some meaning. In particular, at some point I searched my blogspot for "blue" and was amazed to find only five prior uses, which is not correct**. (See Bold Bubble above) But there is a point that our own meaning is involved in our style which I will not reconstruct. While somewhere in this loopiness there is an AL GORE rythm, here is one segment unembedded from other work:
The main point is that there is an old acronym from IBM, about computers, GIGO ("Garbage In, Garbage Out") and the user is not the only one that puts garbage in, yet sometimes you just might get "Good Out".
** see "scientific aside" there along with updated link
Re: Friday the 13th.
Ally Gory of the Bubble.
On Friday after my posts, or it could have been Thursday, I was reflecting on the apparent synchronicity or was it anachronicity? Gotcha. Actually, I was reflecting more on my writing style or flow(hyperbole/hyperbola). Suffice to say, I was curious about the convenience of some of my searches when I would be in need of embedding some meaning. In particular, at some point I searched my blogspot for "blue" and was amazed to find only five prior uses, which is not correct**. (See Bold Bubble above) But there is a point that our own meaning is involved in our style which I will not reconstruct. While somewhere in this loopiness there is an AL GORE rythm, here is one segment unembedded from other work:
Fight of the Century may be the TOE in the door. (Theory of Everythink (sic)) No pun on C-sic. Not to bug you...* is lost con text
[Third times a charm or cut to the chase, I juxtaposition 5 links above.*
Fight of the Century: Keynes vs. Hayek Round Two
Why I am not an Austrian Economist
A new powerhouse for ridiculous GOP economics
Raghuram Rajan: Delineating the Role of Governmentand
Risk and Robustness
and you might scroll over (or not click) to get a sixth sense under Economix.]
The main point is that there is an old acronym from IBM, about computers, GIGO ("Garbage In, Garbage Out") and the user is not the only one that puts garbage in, yet sometimes you just might get "Good Out".
** see "scientific aside" there along with updated link
Monday, October 23, 2006
Krugman v. Pelosi
Not that they are opposed,
I just juxtaposition
the two perspectives.
Krugman: Don't Make Nice.
Pelosi: more than "lame duck is enough" (See "Two Heartbeats..." video)
Together: Not just don't make nice, but more than just a pledge of what is on the table or not.
I just juxtaposition
the two perspectives.
Krugman: Don't Make Nice.
Pelosi: more than "lame duck is enough" (See "Two Heartbeats..." video)
Together: Not just don't make nice, but more than just a pledge of what is on the table or not.
Wednesday, April 05, 2006
WHAT NERVE!
We know he has nerve, but does he have a conscience. When he was running the first time, his conscience not the law was his guide, and he is still on the same course. The Einstein and King George III juxtaposition about following one’s conscience no matter the state is another interesting twist on uncurious George being worried about his own nerve. He is the state and he has only nerve. While he serves others I might add.
On the immigration tangent, if labor is only a substance to be used by those with the power to do so, then it is a drug where the users and abusers should be reigned in. This may mean a new perspective on the health of individuals and the community as well. Retrogressing to my earlier less footnoted or linked style of commentary, I will try to catch up on these later.
Before closing this post I was going to provide only one link, but ran across a news item where only the title sent me on a tangent to a comment:
What the heck is wrong with having a locally adjusted tax credit for the cost of living, by state. That would involve a deduction for the basic costs of living and then a flat rate based on the cost of doing business and government. More details may be the devil, but not necessarily any worse than requiring health care or pushing healthcare savings plans.
NOTE: The "more details" were not that bad in this case as they were more or less just a I imagined and went off on.
On the immigration tangent, if labor is only a substance to be used by those with the power to do so, then it is a drug where the users and abusers should be reigned in. This may mean a new perspective on the health of individuals and the community as well. Retrogressing to my earlier less footnoted or linked style of commentary, I will try to catch up on these later.
Before closing this post I was going to provide only one link, but ran across a news item where only the title sent me on a tangent to a comment:
What the heck is wrong with having a locally adjusted tax credit for the cost of living, by state. That would involve a deduction for the basic costs of living and then a flat rate based on the cost of doing business and government. More details may be the devil, but not necessarily any worse than requiring health care or pushing healthcare savings plans.
NOTE: The "more details" were not that bad in this case as they were more or less just a I imagined and went off on.
Sunday, April 02, 2006
Immigration Debate
While my earlier post reflected the irony (1) of the juxtaposition or strange (2) bedfellows that may have had meaning as a compromise as well as the endorsement of People For the American Way as another indicator that it was balanced, I must highlight my retraction of the sparse indication of meaning which I had in mind if not in print. Here is a more reasoned if not unusual combo(3) which has similarity (4) in at least bucking the tide, not only of immigration but the troubles we find ourselves.
Hint 1. McCain-Feingold partners in campaign finance reform and possible opponents in 2008. [HINT 1B: (4-3-06) More of a comment on Feingold's principled approach on censure vs. McCain's political tact or flip-flop toward the fold.]
Hint 2. Comprehensive Immigration Reform (Kennedy-McCain) as well as the PFAW.
Hint 3. Unusual Combo: Hartmann-Carlson in order of my stumbling on the pieces, not the order referenced.
Hint 4.People for the American Way
Hint 1. McCain-Feingold partners in campaign finance reform and possible opponents in 2008. [HINT 1B: (4-3-06) More of a comment on Feingold's principled approach on censure vs. McCain's political tact or flip-flop toward the fold.]
Hint 2. Comprehensive Immigration Reform (Kennedy-McCain) as well as the PFAW.
Hint 3. Unusual Combo: Hartmann-Carlson in order of my stumbling on the pieces, not the order referenced.
Hint 4.People for the American Way
Tuesday, February 15, 2005
What's good for the goose? Goose the gander!
American Perspectives?
It was interesting juxtaposition which I caught Saturday on C-span.
Ward Churchill “Univ. of Colorado Professor of Ethnic Studies, spoke about his book "On the Justice of Roosting Chickens: Reflections on the Consequences of U.S. Imperial Arrogance & Criminality.",
followed by:
“David Horowitz speaks about academic freedom and urges students to demand more ideological diversity on college campuses, and the inclusion of conservative ideas in college curricula.”.
This after my commenting on local radio with Churchill's attorney(guest) that: we should be careful distinguishing between name calling and calling for actions, and that the remedies that critics wish to impose on the professor may come back to bite those that would impose them. [in so many or slightly more words].
The gist of the controversy is that the professor is suffering from the reactions to his writing where he used the term “little Eichmanns” referring to some of the victims of 9-11 and their support for U.S. imperialism. Never mind the First Amendment, tenure, and state law protecting speech, especially of government workers of the government. The irony is that David Horowitz wants academic freedom too, to balance the “storm troopers”* that teach in most universities.
Freedom of speech is a tricky thing. If we don’t uphold it for what we disagree with, will it even be needed for what we do? However, that does not mean that everything one says or feels is academic. Even being in a book does not just “make it so”. Without opposition there is no way to know what will hold up. Without freedom there is no way to reach the light of truth.
For readers convenience(sixth paragraph, Meet the Terrorists, last sentence)"If there was a better, more effective, or in fact any other way of visiting some penalty befitting their participation upon the little Eichmanns inhabiting the sterile sanctuary of the twin towers, I'd really be interested in hearing about it." This should be enough context and includes considerable mitigation.
* from the same historical reference as "little Eichmanns"?
It was interesting juxtaposition which I caught Saturday on C-span.
Ward Churchill “Univ. of Colorado Professor of Ethnic Studies, spoke about his book "On the Justice of Roosting Chickens: Reflections on the Consequences of U.S. Imperial Arrogance & Criminality.",
followed by:
“David Horowitz speaks about academic freedom and urges students to demand more ideological diversity on college campuses, and the inclusion of conservative ideas in college curricula.”.
This after my commenting on local radio with Churchill's attorney(guest) that: we should be careful distinguishing between name calling and calling for actions, and that the remedies that critics wish to impose on the professor may come back to bite those that would impose them. [in so many or slightly more words].
The gist of the controversy is that the professor is suffering from the reactions to his writing where he used the term “little Eichmanns” referring to some of the victims of 9-11 and their support for U.S. imperialism. Never mind the First Amendment, tenure, and state law protecting speech, especially of government workers of the government. The irony is that David Horowitz wants academic freedom too, to balance the “storm troopers”* that teach in most universities.
Freedom of speech is a tricky thing. If we don’t uphold it for what we disagree with, will it even be needed for what we do? However, that does not mean that everything one says or feels is academic. Even being in a book does not just “make it so”. Without opposition there is no way to know what will hold up. Without freedom there is no way to reach the light of truth.
For readers convenience(sixth paragraph, Meet the Terrorists, last sentence)"If there was a better, more effective, or in fact any other way of visiting some penalty befitting their participation upon the little Eichmanns inhabiting the sterile sanctuary of the twin towers, I'd really be interested in hearing about it." This should be enough context and includes considerable mitigation.
* from the same historical reference as "little Eichmanns"?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)