4MAT Shift?

Hyper-Dig?^

~ of 6 links)
Spoiler alert: ala FP? Or legend of sorts...
The (#'s) below are the sequence of inserting above.
The M-beds within are links to blog searches of this blog.**

(4.) April 23rd, Openly Secular Day!
(1.) The Labor Market Conundrum: The Cyclical And The Secular
(2.) What Would Don Draper Do? Reading Dante in a Secular Age
(5.) Document Proclaims Secular Government
(6.) Mullahs and Heretics [!]
(3.) The Godless Delusion*

* Bingo: Started Reading!
** these italics are bibliographing in progress

Cyclical A. F'N Too Point Oh[!], B. Proof of Life..., C. In "F"n able?, D. Politics is local?, E. Rubber/Glue "Unhinged".
Reading A. A counting Trick? , B. Long Story
Document A. escapement?, B. Absolut(ist)ly..., C. Temporal, D. Two Birds
and A. Reality is the 4D., B. The dig?*** , C. Better Business Bureau
[!] A. Being a Blank "is Hard Work".
delusion A. TIP OF THE FLAME , B. But for Angle , C. Phase II?

*** anomaly of (sc)

Cyclical B:art ~ Rib~L [*~*]

^ 3-26-15
The Dig ? 2b Kantinued ?
1,2,
5, The Vox: Cruz Control?
3,4,
6. Progressive Values: Ctrl F Reich

FP4 SEPT 2014

Original Heading(9-15-14): [SOFA(FP?)]

1. <  Book by it's cover, memo by it's title: historical?
2.  A. Following results., B.  Turning Tables, C. Freakin',  D. Hiatus / Review,  E. Black Friday: Convergence Day

~(3,4)
3. Following results.
~5/
4. A. Brackets and the Debt Clock , B. The Real B. S. of the F. C., C. Who Let the Dogs Out?, D. It's Obama's Turn, E. Pass the Trillion.,
5. A. Being a Blank "is Hard Work"., B. Two Points, C. "OFF A CLIFF", D. Smirking Gun[!]

*1-5 not eggs act lee
Work in Progress , Egg/Road/Sky* , Speculative Physics
~9-16-14 ~further notation/re#'s

Politics is local?

Ground Game ? *

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/an-embassy-statement-a-tweet-and-a-major-misunderstanding/2012/09/12/a2d32a8c-fd24-11e1-b153-218509a954e1_blog.html

http://open.salon.com/blog/ted_frier/2012/09/12/losing_gop_in_denial_over_own_failures
http://www.salon.com/2012/09/10/why_i_left_the_gop/

http://www.salon.com/2012/09/12/mitt%E2%80%99s_shameful_libya_statement/
http://theweek.com/article/index/233148/the-death-of-an-american-in-libya

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/an-embassy-statement-a-tweet-and-a-major-misunderstanding/2012/09/12/a2d32a8c-fd24-11e1-b153-218509a954e1_blog.html

http://www.salon.com/2012/09/13/cairo_embassys_statement_what_went_wrong/

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3032608/ns/meet_the_press-meet_the_press/vp/48959856/#48959768 ***

Not the usual MO.** 

[ http://blog.seattlepi.com/seattlepolitics/2012/09/13/house-race-koster-opts-for-the-full-romney/ ]

*Scroll over is sufficient until [fn] and post /under-construction(also redux labels) R done.
** "well" not exactly [!]

*** dropped link [!]

[Unfinished read, refinished read.(perspectivism) Politics over war.  Obama has made progress in foreign policy, but Republicans want to take it back.  The wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Egypt, and Iran(an evolution) are the examples of diplomacy(d) over preemption.  It all sprung from the 2000 election debacle, resistance to Clinton policy and the failure on September 11th with the supposed post-9-11 world.  But it is spelled out in the perspective that we cannot expect to teach democracy or politics over there, without practicing it over here(^).  I will refrain from further tangents or links on this post, but I will note that the two reads just mentioned also reflect a bit of a balancing act that is not nearly as cut and dry as it might be written.  One of the key differences in the big picture that makes the previous administration a stand out failure in American History is the combination of the voodoo(b) economics(arithmatic/fuzzy math+fuzzy English) with the neo-con perspective of American Exceptionalism (which is not) exemplified by choosing a war without paying for it.  The success that is so difficult is because politics is local except for them^(f).  This is demonstrated by the current Radical Republican opposition(c) to the Arab Spring,^^^ which removed dictators and is allowing(a) for democracy that might not turn out to be to our liking.  Bush said war is hard work, but just because you want to fight, does not mean that progress and peace(with diplomacy and politics) are not harder work, and more profitable.  That is part of true exceptionalism.

^refrain from a bumber snicker]

9-15-12
(a) FOX wrong about Libya says McCain.
(b) Foreign policy is Bane of Politics: bankruptcy bailout business not an option in either.
(c)  Loose lips? Republican Threat to National Security
(d) not! but whiney!

(^) ibid re^frain [see (d)]

9-17-12 (e) not embedded  i.e. that's right, there is no (e)
Seriously [!] folks ?
[^^ Apologies for sarcasm, but there is a diversity of reliability in the perspectives/sources provided.]
[NOW^^^ w/Alex Wagner w/Martin Basher on America Abroad.^^ But natural track of changing the strategy for Romney of change or status quo. i.e. hijacking change and boogieman status quo. Cam-Pain not working, Obama not running.]
[There is an (f) ]
^^ viscous cycle of anachronism
^^^ then Martin Bashir (NeoMitt)(Mittastrophe of asterisked?)

The Be All and End All?

NOT[!] *
Nor,
Neither.

Not to trammel up the consequences,
but "Peace is hard work"
and so are economics and progress.
Not to catch up on the gaming metaphor either.

(See Tax Plan and "Fiscal Terrorism")
Not to mention actual tables.

[ T. O. W.]
Politics ---> Economics, Government, Religion (Values)
Philosophy -
Psychology -
Physics ---> Math, Meaning, Forces(Ge Oh Me Try)***

Leaving aside the dynamics of philosophy and psychology, the internal and external dynamics of thoughts and feelings should be noted.
Also note difference between theories and models,
not to mention** formulay.

* note irony puncutation [!] in regard to the INET dicussion of models in the context of "Moneyball" and the Bard.(next two links) But more importantly in the context of the Platonic system, which I call the Tetrahedron of Will(TOW).
** Or KOW TOW
*** not just to pun but physics is the base and politics the pinnacle in this GPS of whose will and what will happen.

[Update: 7-10-13 hilites added also labels(INET/The Last Word)

True Ledership

No, that is not Leadership, it is the pinnacle of the process.

[9-29-11 Under review re: lede*** (does not require a follow-up as the link morphed) But I am trying to find the lost link This one.]

A lede*** requires a follow-up. Like the constitution has its first three articles or branches of the government, the tetrahedron has its base as a triangle and another dimension, and what is the point? That is political. There are the Legislative, Executive and the Judiciary braches. But what is the point? Or rather the base*?

We the people...

of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

* Oh the humanity
[Another problem? Or anti-pragmatics? The narrative will evolve and involve: Highways or the Low(or No) way. Not to hop the Scotch or translations but...Lock Low Mond?]
["In a perfect world the president ought to wish"...[*]NOT! link(for quote) to be** provided later The Place for Politics.]

** Note: not that I have viewed all the links, but many provide the contrast between progress and anything butT-headism.
[Speaking of Process under-LedeRship.]

*** ledership is not always easy to link: Gunn takes Shot at Alley's Weight.

[Speaking Bane Or Analogies: if spending is the coke, then the debt that Reagan and Bush racked up are illegal debts that need not be paid. Explain that to the defense, healthecare and financial industries(the wealthy) that they need not be paid. In fact, that may actually help regarding the ledership and 2012, if the people realize who the dealers of debt are.]

Delta Dawn


Whose your Daddy?

Rolling Stone. The T[?] (Or the t[!])

[Sum of the some game: War is hard work and progress even more tricky, but a few want(scratch that need) a quick fix.]

[*] [9-21-11 Update: It is regretable that I cannot find the MSNBC segment for the quote above, but as for follow up, pandemonium may be embedded somewhere(not).]

Obama Doctrine?

Allow me to remind you of ledership and the rhetorical. In my format I use it to refer to the heading of a piece as well as a peril to progress. Not that I have embedded the definition here, I have just googled these(2 links) now. But previously touched on it here. And no pun here. But here? I will parse these later, but for now I will claim that it is a position not just a doctrine. Hmmm, maybe doctrine is the word that sticks for some, and it is not partisan or bi-partisan. One important feature is that a policy is not an action, nor a result.

[My last two links which I inserted are on the"peril" of "progress" and refer to the nature of power and intelligence, in the area of freedom and the hard work involved. Just as previous wars were fought under an information embargo of sorts, I do not know if that is really part of the picture now, but whether it is or not, the information is part of the format that goes beyond just the military aspect, to the diplomatic and beyond and back again. Meaning who knows what information will be used to what end or who will use it, get it or misuse it.]

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.}

What the Beck?

[Under-De(con)struction.]
OK, this actually works in the perspective of the way some use words.
As in De for Dem and destruction, and Con for conservative and construction. Heck even conservation. Oops. I think we get the flip-flop. Lack of perspective is the subject, and preemption the aim of their construction. This is a work in progress. I'm still chalking it up.

My friend Thrasymachus* is embedded in the above (con) link...
while our seemingly seemly nemesis might be lost in Flatland.

I have recently revamped my PBMP tetrahedron, to the Tetrahedron of Will or TOW. It all began with my reading of Plato's Republic, going on 40 years ago, and my presentation not in a Platonic solid form but in a Platonic pillar model. Justice being the point, with appetites, emotions, and intellect being the base. I cannot vouch for these as being my original tripod to the triangular pillar, but I more recently reconstructed this balanced purpose on the legs of Physics, Psychology and Philosophy coming together to evolve Justice, much as our constitution rests or rather works with the balance of three branches and rests or works on the people.

Words are sometimes only ideals, but in reality I must say they are always ideals, but in some they are missing the concept of perspective, if not even a dimension(or pun, just dimentioning it), and whether you seem left or right or middle the reality is not even in line or online with a spectrum. The Third Way might not even be enough of a perspective, but it is better than Linear Beck or my way or the highway. [It was purported to be the Clinton way in that the aim was a balance between the goals of the left and right of the political spectrum(Ideally to move the middle nontheless) but I might say that the Obama way is more balanced, and may point to answers that are not always just a balance between two extremes or even two parties, and many people understand that, even though we feel that our way might be better it is hard to let go of our ideals.

[I believe I have now finished construction of this post, but have yet to finish reading the first link, and my "What the Beck" referred to my own preemption or condescending reference in the previous post.]

* Thrasymachus: a character in The Republic, and nickname for a Neo-Con I know, who might more accurately be called a Beck Head, or Eon-Libertarian (which I just pegged). [I won't peg any meaning on the Eon part, only to say I(not quite) flipped Neo.]

[Disclaimer: My first use of the term phrase "What the Beck?" was just yesterday, and until I just googled it, I had no knowledge it was a YouTube Channel, and I only used it as a segue to MoveOn to other issues. A search also found the Daily Beast and Op-Ed references and I might have picked on the Countdown but not the Intelligent Design, but the Gee Oh Me Try is similar but I can't dig up that one.]

[UPDATE 3-17-10: The "seemingly" link does not quite buffer completely, and has moderate moments but lacks perspective and balance let alone appreciation of others or perspective**. It can certainly be understood why everything seems off balance, but it is another to have an intention to balance it or respect dynamics, human or natural.]


** pulled from second link in the context of Thrasymachus

Here We Go Again

GOP Fights Back Over Criticism of Limbaugh
White House Is Accused Of Cynicism, Hypocrisy
by Howard Kurtz

I will save for later, what is probably a very good article or at least closer to what journalism is supposed to be. Which is to not always please me and not always be free of perspective. But the spin and same old tactics seems to be coming from the Republicans. The President had made earlier references to Limbaugh, but a recent one advising the Republicans to stop listening to him was what started the media echo. That was good advice from my perspective and from the perspective of most moderates. Republicans are the ones that have not decided who is their leader and what are their principles. Well, actually the former does not matter because the latter are no different. They need to work on their principles and by focusing on this, they are able to forget them. It is my opinion that it is their principles that are the matter and that they can not recreate themselves. It is not hypocrisy or childish to keep the focus and hardship on them.

In an aside: Chris Matthews is doing them or the country no favor by claiming they have an issue with taxes and keeping your money. All low and most moderate income will see tax reductions or at the point some do, will be compensated by other cost cuts or compensations. Even those that are getting some tax cuts may find other fees increased which only lends to the need for the cuts in the first place. As to Democrats being "all about spending", the Democrats, at least the Obama adminstration, are all about nothing but everything.

In this regard, it seems that if there is anything we can get on the same page on, it is entitlements. We should get back to the safety net concept. That does not mean that certain good ideas are not good for all. But that all entitlements are not needed by some. But in reality, no one wants to give up what they have, so it seems the best field to work it out on is taxes. Similar balance can be taken in regards to international finance, markets and social progress. Maybe a carbon credit for life?

[But back to the Dark Side or Gas Bag (Methane Head No Credit):
Hypocrisy is King!
The Republicans are rallying around Rush while he is eating it up.
He then challenges the President to a debate!
Well the Republican's should put up or shut up.
There is no equivalent to the President.
But the Republicans must decide, is he or is he not the one in charge or would Rush Limbaugh have a debate with Ed Shultz?
Actually the answer is no! Since I believe the challenge is out there. And there have been others (Ron Reagan) he has not accepted. But he should really stick to his own league and maybe Stephen Colbert. Or warm up to Rachel Maddow.]

[Seriously, Rachel Maddow and the link just provided, really put her in a league of her own, but actually the one that Rush Limbaugh and Michael Steele should live up to before they even merit the jobs they have, (not to mention the other intelligent Enternewsmeant or Fun'n Edifying Personalities I have noted above, depending on the job they aspire to)but here are some bonus links: Michael Moore * vs. Any Rand, talk about doubling down or matches.]

[And I don't know who got it backwards but Rush did say, he wanted Obama to fail before Obama suggested that Republicans stop listening to Rush. This was Obama taking on the old way with the Republicans, not a direct attack on Rush but his ideas and tactics which Republicans have so hard a time changing, and they need to make it about Rush. [Update: too enough!]

* [Plus Must See TV: FNBC ](For funny? No for real...


...Financial News with a real anchor!)]

Patriotism is Progressive

Not just a cliche!
See the movie, check out the principles, and the book.

[Looking back, looking forward, and in between?(updated) Key reads are convoluted, amidst those nfry and those I have or will review. Labels will hint at some progress. In this particular, the bold forward (above) is a programming note for the Bill Moyers Journal, airing TOMORROW!]

[Heck, here it is: Middle East Policy, and while I am at it(nfry) Energy and Labor! (Speaking of hard work, see above first link.)

Great Segue!

After Day 3 of the Democratic National Convention,
my first comments are:
So far, so good!
"No way! No how! No McCain!" Now that is a flip-flop.

Seriously...
From "Faint Praise/Criticism" to Progressive Narratives.
Not to mention pragmatism...

but I would like to note belated congratulations
to Rachel Maddow (nfry*) on getting her new show on MSNBC. Rachel refers to herself as a liberal not a partisan. Righteously so.[*] It is really hard to criticize Rachel, but she is the perfect flip-flop of Pat Buchanan. He is sometimes valid in his criticism of Republicans and praise or suggestions for Democrats, only the better to eat you my dear. Said the wolf to Little Red Riding Hood. While Rachel may be the same for Democrats, only the better for the country.** (Embedded in these asterisks are references to their work. Earlier encounters with Howard Kurtz, long time agitation by Pat Buchanan and recent enthusiasm tempered with caution for Rachel. Let me just say that her liberal enthusiasm and hopes may be cast as negative shadows on the pragmatism needed for progress.*** But criticism of Democrats and our process, taken in the right light, can be good for all.)

*The segue is filled with the likes of Howard Kurtz, and Patrick Buchanan.
** not a perfect flip-flop, the Democrats not the country.
*** it might have helped, yet it might not have, to remember the particular comment that I had a problem with, but it was only a comment on the progress of the convention or one of the speakers that caused me to wonder about her perspective as she makes progress. Had it changed or is it what got her where she is?

[A regressive update, meaning only a thought that I had when Biden was announced: That he should well vet humor and plagiarism. Now that is a well contained line. Of attack, for us, and by us, not necessarily of us. And depending upon McCain's VP a wonder of the Republican vetting process.]
[John McCain: An Experience We Don't Need! Thanks to Thom Hartmann.]{Not to mention: Breaking the Yalta Conspiracy}

[* 9-3-08 Update link]

QCON and Flip-Flop: AN IRAN OUT

This is a quick comment on the news and a flip-flop on myself.

On Bush and Iran, there is hope **** that progress can be made.
It is all up to what Bush will accept and what Iran will agree to.
We could possibly "Trust but Verify" and any sort of solution depends on others
trusting what we can agree to. While any so-called enemy that might be "appeased" * has little record to base that on. Critics of the administration must hold them accountable and give aid to the "enemy" by assuring accountability, not politics. The big question is whether Iran can in any way accept restrictions on nuclear research while the administration accepts no accountability to international agreements. [NOT! **]

* quotation marks indicate fuzzy English except the Reagan remark.

[This is based only on a radio snippet of Bush's hopes for success.]

[**] - [ This IS an update from www.JustForeignPolicy.org thanks to Thom Hartmann having the Robert Naiman as guest, just prior to having John Bolton speak to the contrary I presume.]
[My original point is that there is always hope that diplomacy, even tough diplomacy, can work, as long as the other side of the table has a reasonable alternative to giving in to what is unreasonable, and if there is no hope that we will be reasonable, then standing fast is just as reasonable, in the light of unreason. While I am not charging unreason, just not open *** reason, while we find it hard to find reason on the other side.]

A. -
B. -
C. -
D. - Bingo!

*** it is often buried somewhere

[Myth? Pre-visited.
Connected back later.
And dialing in.]
[Mission Impossible Script Writers Guild. ]

**** link added 6-12-08

Rehash or Just Hash.

Hill Briefed on Waterboarding in 2002
In Meetings, Spy Panels' Chiefs Did Not Protest, Officials Say
By Joby Warrick and Dan Eggen
Washington Post Staff Writers
Sunday, December 9, 2007; A01

Or Sour Mash?
Washington Post: Democrats Including Pelosi Told of Waterboarding in 2002
jonathanturley.org

The implications are that there could be something wrong with the pressure that Democrats are under, either from the actual facts of the situation or the interpretation from some perspectives. But it better be cleared up before the lid blows off the principles of this nation or the party, let alone our hopes for progress. This is my take on this, the implications also being that this may not be breaking news but a matter that I have already filtered and others are just getting to the party. I think the simplest explanation is that full disclosure was not done and then even more disclosure was not allowed, but the use of that information in leadership roles is going to be eventually explained if not utilized for the common good. But that is just what is so hard to count on, and meanwhile the "hard work" of our troops and our grassroots, let alone any base is being squandered, or should I say, about to go down the drain.

I must note that I had heard Jonathan Turley speak on this issue on the Randi Rhodes show yesterday, but I have yet to more than barely start to read either of these articles.

[Correction: I did read four paragraphs of Jonathan Turley's piece and just thought there was more, and I must give a lot of credit to his fourth paragraph:

This also explains the failure of the Democrats to block votes that seemed to legitimate waterboarding and unlawful surveillance. If true, the knowledge of Democratic leaders shows a deep disconnect and possible dishonesty between our representatives and the voters. In many ways, this will be the test of our political system. If the public returns to its prior slumber after this story, there is little hope for a system that seems to replicate this type of conduct.

I don't really know what the public can do, but the Democrats better do more than wonder and not wander through any course that does not correct their staggering work.

To Democrats in the Senate:

CAP THE FILIBUSTER!

First I would like to support the filibuster as one of the best protections for the rights of the minority. But here are a few questions I pose:

Why are Republicans not required to hold the floor if they are filibustering?

I would suggest that a cap be put first on cloture votes and keep them talking to show who is stalling.

What is the number of cloture votes taken versus successful legislation passed? (1 in 6 as of July.)
It would seem that things are already mucked up quite a bit, with cloture vote on top of cloture vote, just how would they carry on all this filibustering at the same time?

It seems difficult to right this course, and the Democrats are at the helm.

The Democrats had a period of success and "hard work" at the start of the session, I think it is time they put their foot down, and start forcing filibusters. There are only so many hours to congress. Is there not a time limit for each and are there enough hours left?

The only thing that seems to come from this is the understanding that progress is so hard to make. "Compromise" was a key word in the defense of the Republican's expecting some from the Democrats, but if voters will look at the bills presented, they must ask who and what is already compromised.

The answer to the first question may be: Because the Democrats want to get things done.

If there is any validity to the claim that Democrats are "do nothing"(which is a strategy the Republicans promote), how can that hold water, when the minority Republicans won't allow votes to be held, even when they would be vetoed. Not to mention the power a minority of Progressive Democrats are not using, to make sure nothing gets done when it is warranted.

May the Republicans long hold the Right of the minority. It should be clear the the Democrats are making compromises, not necessarily good or bad or getting anywhere. But sometimes they are holding together. That is another number to watch.

Presently Pre-

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

Recommended reading in this area...

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

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

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

[Links now embedded,but not read.]

Truth Tellers

Thom Hartmann notes that the truth teller of the Democrats is Kucinich and for the Republicans it is Ron Paul, who notes the history of the Republican party as against wars. And thanks to a quick google, the first few paragraphs hits it out of the park **. "Way out", as it is put there. Or a slam dunk if you will.

That was still the situation when Clinton was president and even when the current Bush was campaigning against being nation builders and policeman to the world. Another point in this regard is that old Bush in a China Shop metaphor where:
when we broke it, we don't own it, but we might pay for it.

Final note: On Unity08 plans for a bipartisan ticket, I think it is crazy or at minimum won't work. Now, not that it won't succeed. But not necessarily for the country. It really is hard to take a negative attitude with something that seems so middle of the road, but then if we put the people in the middle of the road, they may just get run down. OK! So metaphors may not work, but the may make a point, and getting somewhere that has a point is the "hard work". There! Does that make any progress on the point. Well it may just be going round and round, but that may be another result, not that I am trying to get the geometry covered. But now that I have run that into the ground, I will take a tangent and note that there may be room for dialogue on the third party or third or fourth way. Dialogue and debate is happening within each party. If there are any outliers. Those hanging back; LaRouche (may get the point); Nader (I am not so sure); Bloomberg or Hagel; or not lastly Wesley Clark. But above we have noted, and I believe I recall now that my comparison (if not noted earlier) was between Ron Paul and LaRouche rather than Kucinich, that there are certain mavericks but at least they are participating now. I would harken back to my point about Red and Blue America and the threat to the green. It must be noted that "at the risk of being obvious" must have been too deep and the PI editors* changed my word "green" to "color" which put a completely different tint on my letter. My point is that Unity08 may be more about the green and may not get us out of seeing red.

*(In the last line of "the threat to the green" link, which may have been a threat to someone's green, if not not black and white enough to fit their grey matter.)

**11:35 AM amended [six paragraphs to be precise, I had not read much beyond "To many people, however..." and that is where we must remember the words of Rudy Guliani, on or shortly after September 11th, something like: Aren't you glad George Bush is president? Case closed. These guys cannot fight or debate without misconstruing the point or the enemy, period. Black and white enough?]

Fearnauts

There is no good and evil.
There are only goods and needs
and wants, and no freedom
from them.

So work on the good,
not just the goods
and justice will flow,
not evil.

Fear not but face good
and fear will fly.
Fearnauts may fly,
but will is not
just the stuff of dreams.

Fear may be,
but results,
don’t have to be
but will.

Dedicated to the Praxis Peace Institute

This poem was crafted just before the tragedy at Virginia Tech (The victims to which I also dedicate this)but it did not feel right to submit at the time, with the seeming implication of the first line, however there is no good and evil, but man's nature. (This is culturally precise(CP) given the view of women's nature)

I also dedicate this to the Great White line-up at the Republican debate last night. Not that there is anything wrong with power, but force is not the only power. If any of them are even half the Roosevelt who launched the Great White Fleet, they are the half that carried the "big stick" and only half understand the other Roosevelt and "the only thing we have to fear". They are no Roosevelt, not even half of either.

[5-10-07 reference back to link Council of Nice and a new link on Kant(as in The Liaison Report Between Common Sense and Kant
but reading it is hard work, so I will add- - what is wrong with faith
in reason and criticism and a process for progress ?]

4-11-07 Terrorists Strike Shock Jock and...

"young women" athletes.

Jason Witlock, on TODAY, attacks "opportunists" and "domestic terrorists" Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton for "causing them to receive threats on their lives." While he seems to be placing this in some rational context, he continues they "continue to go light fires around the country". Frank Luntz talks about "words that don't work" also on TODAY.

These clips taken off the Internet are not necessarily in context, but they do afford an opportunity to react. Taken separately they are part of the problem. Individual fires that need to be addressed. But the metaphor of war or fires are mixed metaphors, or are they (?) People are not trees, but fire fighters do light back fires to fight fires, and this is an interesting "firestorm"[Matt Lauer, 2nd clip] For the reaction that these "opportunists" are accused of "causing" are needed, not only to stop the spread of smoldering degradation, but to light the way to more confrontation. If the market is supposed to be what will address this, and supposed to be free, then how can shining light on that market be blamed for correcting it.

More light needs to be focused on the producers of these clips and their overall programming. For the smoke was blown by their presentation and likely lack of confrontation directly, at least as they are spread on the Internet. Matt certainly let this spread without even picking up a shovel, which is what fire fighters (the media) should do, rather than aid the arsonists or real opportunists, like the networks. The real light may be that the market obviously does not work in either focusing light or fighting fires, but more light or more reaction are not the terrorists.

My point is that if September 11th, 2001 changed things, maybe April 11th, 2007(the day MSNBC canned Imus) has changed things, and we will really fight in a new light. Unfortunately light is not new, and fire was a great invention{?), but smoke is only a signal that often is just blown away.

If this is just a media war, it should not evolve to just "star" wars, where personalities rise to the skies and continue to fire from satellites. That product of progress will really shine the light on the intentions(?) of the market and the culture of personalities(Imus) who might step up on the bottom line of all else. If he makes it elsewhere will he change his shtick? So far intentions are really lost in the smoke of slightly longer sound bites, that are just more little fires. Demonstrating that the so-called "opportunists" Witlock "blames" for setting fires are really doing the "hard work" that needs doing.

(apologies that these are only clips and I did not directly address much of either)

[4-17-07 slight punctuation changes and note 3(?):
intentions(?) of the market, invention(?) of fire- and there is more association than I thought of at the time I was just noting the ironies of mixed metaphors (?) ]

Apples and Oranges and Cherry Picking.

[UNITY MODEL? Or Filtering Will?]
One of the comments after the ISGR (Iraq Study Group Report) release was that it is not a fruit salad. Well, what could be said for the presidents speech? Going beyond the metaphor that he is still mixing apples and oranges when it comes to what got us into Iraq, congress must be the taster that stirs the juices from the bottom of the mix and even adds a fruit or more to the mix. I don’t know if this is just another way of straddling the fence of will and hope, but it means that while the president has a habit of cherry picking that has not changed, the fence may have tumbled under the weight of the fruit trees. Congress must call apples, apples, and oranges, oranges, and any other fruit, just what they are. The cherry here is that while it is not called a time table, there is a time frame that he is aware of. (November?) Congress much verify all the fruit in this salad, and add some that the ISGR have recommended.

Fruit salad metaphor aside, I have earlier made reference to the old adage "the proof is in the pudding", but that the hard work of the mix was not done before we got in this fix, we have seen something that is a just desert. While Bush’s admission that "Where mistakes have been made, the responsibility rests with me" is not an accounting of what his will has wrought, the following sentence "It is clear that we need to change our strategy in Iraq" is a sign of hope. Congress must verify all the ingredients in any recipes, add their own and toss the nuts. They have complete control of the pantry.

Metaphor aside, and it was not easy to stay away from the salad for the pudding, I would like to clarify more hope than just the two lines. This may tread more into cynicism as I fight the urge to indulge in it, it should be noted that the president seemed more subdued, and paced and did not resort to the patronizing act of speaking slowly. It was a very well delivered speech, delivered in a more realistic tone. Now it is our job to check that reality and work on it together. It should not be too much to ask that after six years he has made some progress, but that must not be only in the ability to more humbly deliver a speech or to conceal his recognition that someone else is in charge and that his will has a part in who soon will be.

Falling fruit trees and fence crushing aside, I will address a more subtle irony and a more specific branch. It has been said that we will fight them over there so that we won’t have to fight them over here. Now it is being said that we must clear and hold, and today the president implied that the enemy is likely to move on. That contradiction should be a big concern in the world of rhetoric but in the world of reality, it is a very big world that already has battles unmentioned, or unrealistically referred to; Afghanistan and Somalia, just two. Diplomacy was only referenced in where "We will use America's full diplomatic resources to rally support for Iraq from nations throughout the Middle East." Diplomacy is not a pep rally held by cheerleaders. I think that as General Pace, (I believe) today called this a pivot point, a focal point must be considered. The irony is that it does not fit into a world of metaphors. It only fits in a world of balance that is much more hard work, rather than a world of spin and counter-balance. I really don’t know if it is too contradictory but just the idea that the Department of Defense such as it is, is rather ironically labeled, you can see where this takes us. Maybe a Department of Peace is little out of focus as a counter balance, but that is a matter that Politics should look at. Every time Politics is noted as a matter that must be avoided, it must be looked at as a form of denial of reality, as much as the denial of Physics, Philosophy and Psychology are. Now where does this fit into our picture of what a society or civilization should be? Politics is about the balance of power, and the balance of nature that Will is a part if we picture it.

Resolved?

"Sacrifice" A tribute to reality: my way of subtitling a segue to a fine piece of emotion, and sense of reality by Keith Olbermann. And now for a tangent into my reflection on reality.

Reality?

There is no reality.
Reality is what you make it. (Long Story Short: pop down to *)
Scratch that.
Reality is what we make it.
Scratch that.
Reality is what the "is" is.
Now that triggers a reaction.
Scratch that.

But beyond these perspectives
consider our actions.
The third time may be the charm.
The charm is not to ignore the you and I,
or the us and the them,
but the interaction, that we can cause.
and to consider where we can take reality,
if we can face reality
at all.

* Bush is the prime example, and a leader in this regard. The reality is that we can each feel we can make it alone, and disregard or force a perspective.

Justice may be the best example of why we must continue to look back as we move forward, as well as be held accountable for each, and may be why there is so much "hard work".

Maybe it is time to start from scratch
or at least put the "hard work" into a
model for progress.

Is there any irony in that that is too taxing?