No disrespect.
Nor circular wag'N train.
or empty chair ?
[!] It
must mean... [!]
[the un-tan'g'ent]
^?~ n ? : x. The
New Compendium y. The
Billy Club... z. More
Gill~Let? [!]
Showing posts sorted by date for query wag. Sort by relevance Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by date for query wag. Sort by relevance Show all posts
Tuesday, March 03, 2015
Friday, March 21, 2014
Ouroboros
Dimentions
WSM
Consciousness is too cubed.
SE 3-21-2014
Happy SE [!]
44 ?
dot Facetious D-wag
dot No Bell
dot Math is next
Period Harmony*
Light Speed
Trigger Alert
* divergent 5 OW(no clue ! )
Thursday, March 20, 2014
Facetious D-wag
Monday, December 23, 2013
A Tail of Caution
Not that I intend to wag the dog,
but doggin' the wags? (fn)
I will let U SC [!]**
On a more mundane line, or mudlane^ nine...
I reference the "hack list" per se not the characters or authors. *
Bazinga! It's a culture thing !
Knot so Random Guy!
How'zabout Smith Zoning Limits?
ven under draft: (Hobbes~Locke~Newton~Liebniz~ ?Swift)
My mocumentary* was not intent on this Web of Charlotte or EB' n flo ...
I stepped in it.^
...a good caption go to Hegel?
a good crisis go to waste."
* "~"
^ '~'
~ = alternate reference/legend 2b evolved
i.e. anachronistic or non linear notations.
**/(fn) irony:
(1) deja vu?
(2) alter wing?
(3) alter hacks
(4) nature calls? (FP)
but doggin' the wags? (fn)
I will let U SC [!]**
On a more mundane line, or mudlane
I reference the "hack list" per se not the characters or authors. *
Bazinga! It's a culture thing !
Knot so Random Guy!
How'zabout Smith Zoning Limits?
ven under draft: (Hobbes~Locke~Newton~Liebniz~ ?Swift)
My mocumentary* was not intent on this Web of Charlotte or EB' n flo ...
I stepped in it.
 |
| "Never let... |
...a good caption go to Hegel?
a good crisis go to waste."
* "~"
~ = alternate reference/legend 2b evolved
i.e. anachronistic or non linear notations.
**/(fn) irony:
(1) deja vu?
(2) alter wing?
(3) alter hacks
(4) nature calls? (FP)
Monday, March 19, 2012
ROF, WOF
Ring of Fire
Or Bush!
[I may have forgotten the original excuse for the BB acronym. It was not the Buffet Bureau, and I am not sure** of (yet to find) the Ring of Fire links from this weekend(as I jotted down the above thoughts yesterday), which may have triggered the wag*on Freedom.]
* Republicans Repeal Beatitudes?
** sure: Occupy Movement
[Yes the wag is war on freedom. Woof? (on or?) War on/or freedom? Wag the Woof? Yes, Freedom is wagged as a word, but the effects are farther*** from freedom.]
[Hard Ball,"Wow, it's getting too sophisticated." through 3-and-a-half men and Winning!]]
Tuesday, September 08, 2009
What President Obama should say tomorrow.
He should warn the people not to fall for the "wag the dog" media rather than * worry about the "Blue Dog Democrats".
Ok, this might be none too clear. But he should not spell out a veto threat or call for Democrats to be good soldiers.
[9-9-09: What he said to American Students.]
[*9-9-09 post link option: "any more than" may read better.]
Ok, this might be none too clear. But he should not spell out a veto threat or call for Democrats to be good soldiers.
[9-9-09: What he said to American Students.]
[*9-9-09 post link option: "any more than" may read better.]
Wednesday, September 27, 2006
Time for us to go
TO WORKThe new Un-Frame for Them?
Republicans would actually want to lose so that they can blame the Democrats so that they can return to fight at a later date? Now that is courage. NOT!
But this is the unspin. Would they really risk possible impeachment of Bush for the sake of their own power? Not that Democrats or the people would have the guts. Maybe they want the Dog to wag. But this puts a spin on politics that I have been trying to halt. My point is that governing is hard work, which Republicans do not believe in, and would rather let Democrats carry the load, while they run away to fight another day. How is that good for the country?
Is this just more to talk about, to keep us from the "hard work"? It also distracts from and should raise questions of which came first, the strategy or the words of regret (or coming to their senses) which some conservatives express. Another question: do they put themselves before facing the issues?
AND MORE: it will be TIME FOR US TO GO TO WORK.
Will they work with Democrats for those two years?
Will the Democrats be finished even reviewing let alone correcting the last six?
Will the Democrats even play "the game" that it has been for Republicans? If they play it as well, they would cut them out of it all. Demostrate that we can handle debate and division and bring issues to the fore for the coming two years not just for the next four, but for the people, our country and the world.
I must thank The Thom Hartmann Show for sending me on this tangent, or search: "Time for us to Go". We should agree, it is time for Republicans to go, and for any that survive, not to go back to the politics of either nine words or sixteen. Thanks to Garrison Keillor as well. But I would say (to Reagan's nine)
Let them not be in the government for they are there to help themselves.
And I must make reference to my earlier posts.
A Pre-emptive Comment 11-15-05
Politics 11-24-05
Speaking of Running 3-18-06
Hold of Course 3-17-06
[Tangents are the nature of how things connect,
when every point is in context of the whole.] Not incidentally, quantummatter.com
Republicans would actually want to lose so that they can blame the Democrats so that they can return to fight at a later date? Now that is courage. NOT!
But this is the unspin. Would they really risk possible impeachment of Bush for the sake of their own power? Not that Democrats or the people would have the guts. Maybe they want the Dog to wag. But this puts a spin on politics that I have been trying to halt. My point is that governing is hard work, which Republicans do not believe in, and would rather let Democrats carry the load, while they run away to fight another day. How is that good for the country?
Is this just more to talk about, to keep us from the "hard work"? It also distracts from and should raise questions of which came first, the strategy or the words of regret (or coming to their senses) which some conservatives express. Another question: do they put themselves before facing the issues?
AND MORE: it will be TIME FOR US TO GO TO WORK.
Will they work with Democrats for those two years?
Will the Democrats be finished even reviewing let alone correcting the last six?
Will the Democrats even play "the game" that it has been for Republicans? If they play it as well, they would cut them out of it all. Demostrate that we can handle debate and division and bring issues to the fore for the coming two years not just for the next four, but for the people, our country and the world.
I must thank The Thom Hartmann Show for sending me on this tangent, or search: "Time for us to Go". We should agree, it is time for Republicans to go, and for any that survive, not to go back to the politics of either nine words or sixteen. Thanks to Garrison Keillor as well. But I would say (to Reagan's nine)
Let them not be in the government for they are there to help themselves.
And I must make reference to my earlier posts.
A Pre-emptive Comment 11-15-05
Politics 11-24-05
Speaking of Running 3-18-06
Hold of Course 3-17-06
[Tangents are the nature of how things connect,
when every point is in context of the whole.] Not incidentally, quantummatter.com
Tuesday, September 26, 2006
Missing link?
No really. A headline two posts ago is what was missing or what started me on Wag the Dog...
Spy Agencies Say Iraq War Worsens Terror Threat a New York Times piece by Mark Mazetti was on the front page of my Sunday local paper. Not exactly an October Surprise, but then there was the Fox appearance of Bill Clinton that topped the cake.
Democracts are stuck in pre-9/11 thinking and Republicans are thinking post-9/11. We must run with that. Pre-9/11 thinking by the Democrats may have gotten Bin Laden if the Republicans had used it. Post-9/11 thinking by Republicans, is actually no different than their pre-9/11 thinking.
This is where I think I was going, when I left off, Sunday.
This whole Liaison Report is where we have been.
Spy Agencies Say Iraq War Worsens Terror Threat a New York Times piece by Mark Mazetti was on the front page of my Sunday local paper. Not exactly an October Surprise, but then there was the Fox appearance of Bill Clinton that topped the cake.
Democracts are stuck in pre-9/11 thinking and Republicans are thinking post-9/11. We must run with that. Pre-9/11 thinking by the Democrats may have gotten Bin Laden if the Republicans had used it. Post-9/11 thinking by Republicans, is actually no different than their pre-9/11 thinking.
This is where I think I was going, when I left off, Sunday.
This whole Liaison Report is where we have been.
Sunday, September 24, 2006
WAG THE DOG? Who started it?
OCTOBER SUPRISE? Not really.
Two thoughts occurred to me, or I concurred with something I had heard, that if there were an October Surprise, that finding Bin Laden or hitting Pakistan may be the likely examples. Not yet October, but the French leak that maybe Bin Laden has died and Pakistan leaks that they were threatened earlier.
At this point I will pause to reflect on further links, having included more than I have read yet and lost one.
Two thoughts occurred to me, or I concurred with something I had heard, that if there were an October Surprise, that finding Bin Laden or hitting Pakistan may be the likely examples. Not yet October, but the French leak that maybe Bin Laden has died and Pakistan leaks that they were threatened earlier.
At this point I will pause to reflect on further links, having included more than I have read yet and lost one.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)