What's going on?

Recent events are hard to stay on top of,
but it may be time to "run the table".
My reference earlier to "hit and run"
is the crowd that will stay the course.

But enough of the usual stuff.

Here are my recent post along with some links with more comments to be added later:

Election Fixes -- SJM 8016 / U.S. Attorney Scandal

Blatherwatch
CREW [Center for Ethics and Responsibility in Government]

Leahy on Wegoted.com
UNDER OATH! THREE CHEERS! Leahy! Senate Judiciary! Hearings!

Northwest Progressive Institute McKay v. McCabe
___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___

Digging deeper: McKay "stunned" This one I endorse as a long article.
Earlier.
___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___
DIGGING EVEN DEEPER.

One Nail in the Coffin of Republican Slander: [1.]McKay nominated Sept. 19th, 2001

Carol Lam / [2.]Cunningham Corruption Case?
David Iglesias Three for Three[3.] Not prosecuting Dems fast enough?
OK THIS IS A CONSPIRACY It must be Wikipedia's fault. Blame Billy, Blame Wiki.

And Long Story Short: Congresspedia [First two sentences: Unbelievable!]

In late 2006, the Justice Department fired (or asked for the resignation of) eight U.S. attorneys all previously appointed by President Bush. Earlier in 2006, a provision included in the reauthorization of the Patriot Act allowed these positions to be filled by the administration without Senate approval.
[OK TWO MORE]In early 2007, hearings were held on the matter in both the House and Senate Judiciary Committee on the firings. Several of the fired attorneys testified that they had been contacted by members of Congress or executive officials about pending cases shortly before their termination. Such contact by members of Congress is a violation of both House and Senate rules.

I don't usually do so much homework, but then more than the media apparently. Unless it's the vast left wing conspiracy.

[4.]Paul K. Carlton in mid investigation of Republicans?

Not one the Eight: [5.] Kevin V. Ryan Resigns on principle
[6.,7. & 8. - H.E. Cummins III, - - Daniel Bogden - - Margaret Chiara ]

These are listed on the Wikipedia as 7 attorneys, plus an unlisted prosecutor who was replaced by a Rove aide. The math may not add up, but the 8 listed here include one, Kevin V. Ryan who resigned and all I could find were appointed by Bush. Which conflicts with the idea that Bush had not replace any attorneys, but fits in with that they were not serving at his pleasure.

So having done more homework than I have in quite some time; for not having done what Bill Clinton did, how were all eight of these appointed by Bush?

Two more sources - in their defense?

SJM 8016 / US Attorney Scandal

Democrats must put ethics and the law back on the table.
While as Professor Domke said at one of our PCO trainings in Olympia, Democrats run to govern, and Republicans govern to run... I would say that those who are of neither party see what is not on the table. [ALSO MEANING: REPUBLICANS ARE ALWAYS CAMPAIGNING, POLITICS CAN NEVER BE OFF THE TABLE, PLAY IT FORWARD, PLAY IT HARD!]

Those on the so-called Left and those of the non-partisan middle, know what is right.

So while Democrats are working on issues for us, Republicans will be working on other issues against us. So we must face them on all fronts or they will flank us.

ON A RELATED ISSUE OF ETHICS, THE LAW AND GOVERNMENT: and where they will be putting the pressure...

Remember there are several levels of government but the people count, please help them count by supporting this getting from the ground up. Leaders won't go where people fear to follow, but they should go when they have the people and the issues.

WHAT IS THE PERSPECTIVE I NOTE BELOW?

A: Outside interests may not file ethics complaints against members of Congress. They may only file ethics complaints against each other. "And that almost never happens," said Sloan.
B. We sure hope Adam Smith will do the rare and righteous thing: make that complaint- and show us that Democrats will give equal treatment and oversight to both geese and the ganders.

ETHICS SHOULD NOT BE OUTSIDE INTERESTS! Italics quoted from BlatherWatch link [McKay testimony] previous post.


THE ONLY THING BLACK AND WHITE IS A VOTE: But while the law is not just ethics, even the law has a spirit and the letter. So gray areas matter, but people should count. THAT IS A BIG CONNECTION.

Election Fixes

As an up-close witness of the 2004 Washington gubernatorial election,
the "McKay testimony" must be investigated. In my view this is a nationwide effort to put political pressure where it should not be. In most other places, politics has wide latitude, but the election process needs much more scrutiny.

MARCH 4TH, 1789 Began the March

THE U.S. CONSTITUTION TOOK EFFECT

March 14th, 2007 is the day by which
Washington State Senators need to hear from you.

If you are not with the constitution, what are you?

President Bush, before his first campaign was over said,
when it came to the law his conscience was his guide.
Where will your's lead us?

Congratulations KPTK! WE GOT ED!

And Randi and Stephanie, and Thom
[4-24-07: loopy link inserted for reconstruction]

- -
[8-2-07: ADJUSTED THIS DATE -
GO LEFT TV
Air America Radio
Progressive Talk Radio KPTK AM1090 Seattle
FILTER OF SORTS]
- -

[adjusted this date 8-11-07: ifilm of Spike TV
The Colbert Report
The Daily Show ]

Five of the Heavy Hundred are on one local station: AM1090

The 100 most important radio talk show hosts in America!

NUMBER 5.
Ed Schultz www.wegoted.com

Number 13.
Randi Rhodes: The Randi Rhodes Show

Number 36.
Stephanie Miller: The Stephanie Miller Show

Number 51 Thom Hartmann: The Thom Hartmann Show

Rounding out the court. Maybe the center.
Number 27. Clark Howard.

OK! My progressive spin almost missed Clark, but the term "important" over "popular" was a factor in the "Heavy Hundred", and his 1 hr time-slot midnight to 1AM may hint at that and the progressive lean of the listeners or hourly demographics. Clark is both important and popular, just not labeled progressive.*

FLIP FLOP THE LIST!
Considering these personalities and their news value, entertainment and progressive intent,Rachel Maddow (while not even found in the top 250) must be on the bench.
What I am saying is that, rounded out to a balance of sort
but with progressive and informative and entertainment value, she may have topped a list with the numbers flipped. It would be hard to say that Thom, Stephanie, Randi and Ed have any particular strengths that would flip-flop the list, other than my feeling that being progressive, informative and entertaining should be considered in that order, rather than the method used for the Heavy Hundred.
On my scale Rachel Maddow plays well off the bench and deserve her own honors, not to mention her on-air teammate Kent Jones.

MY IDEAL PROGRESSIVE LIST[Reality Flip Flopped]
Or from spirited to spiritual. Going up?

[RACHEL MADDOW] A UNIQUE BALANCE OF INFO AND HUMOR
THOM HARTMANN
STEPHANIE MILLER
RANDI RHODES
ED SCHULTZ
MIKE MALLOY: REALITY BASED
[NOT BEST REPRESENTED IN LINEAR FORM]

[Apologies for not noting one of the top 250, Mike Malloy who is a spiritual warrior of sorts.
If there were a FOX NEWS of the left, Mike Malloy would fit the bill as the nightly lead,
but for me he is too much on a Reality Rant to make good bedtime stories.]
Now just to sort my own review, I love all these guys, for different reasons, but would put progress over money and fun, and that is what I wish for all.

* I don't relish labels, but then, it is a sorting. Long Story Short: (or in my usual way: Runting the Rant) Maybe the Heavy Hitter (Oops) Hundred list does reflect the order of "Agressive Progressives", but I would flip flop the list and call it Just Progressive! But the problem always is, coming from a perspective or getting somewhere.

Geometry of Purpose

Belated Congratulations for Fives Years
on Permanent Defense
Celebrating 5 years of facing the offensive likes of the Right,
and the offensive on the government and the middle class by
the likes of those like Tim Eyman.

Not that "3 strikes yer out" * does not work for baseball or should not be used to put repeat offenders in jail. It is too bad that at that rate Eyman is not at least out of the initiative business.

Geometry? Well there is the baseball diamond,
and then there is my paradigm I call The Power Broker Mountain Project [PBMP].
But I am thinking more of the parallel efforts which are being made not always in touch with each other, but headed in the same direction. My recent refocus on the local, means finetuning the approaches.

Two related efforts:
Not wanting to do justice to Culture Warrior Bill O'Reilly, I have coined, borrowed or claimed the position of Cultural Physicist, where everything matters. This effort led me to checking on an Internet parable (scroll down to The Tomato Company) and found the following Global Intelligence Briefing for CEOs found at The Braden Files by one Herb Meyer who by one American Thinker: "knocks the ball out of the park, explaining concisely and clearly the nature of the challenges facing Western Civilization."

And if I may connect more dots(and the ball park metaphor was not what I was going for) but I recall my poems on these parallels of sorts(the likes of who come to mind).

Right Face Left Faith

Great minds think alike
But being alike does not make right
Being right may make might
But more important is thinking
Right?

Being right is more likely
Why great minds will think alike
Thinking may not be so likely
In those that just think might
Right.

Faith is nowhere near alike
The truth that others think is might
Faith is might and more like maybe
Unless you only think it's right
Not maybe!

The physicist point?

Unified Poem

Everything
is but
a Wave
between
perspectives
in Time
and Space

Now to continue the path, and thanks again for the work of Andrew Villeneuve and Permanent Defense.

* just another initiative as segue

Local Action: Accountability

HOLDING SPOT: IN THE DOG HOUSE
Contact Your Rep:
Help finding your legislator
Washington State of Impeachment: After Downing Street WA
Another local group: EFOR Olympia March 1st
Backbone Campaign: March4th
National Comment On Washington: Democrats.com

Holding Spot: Meaning I shall return... to improve this spot or the links.
Note: last link below and and new Label: Local

Holding Spot: Local War Powers

Local Action Item: JustForeignPolicy.org Petition to Local Representative
(Comments which I added to the above action.)

It is very regrettable to feel
that such action is necessary and that it probably does not go far enough.
It is a shame
to tie the presidents hands in the defense of the nation,
but even more that he is not locked up *.

I am sure that these come as seemingly disrespectful words but no where near the disrespect too many Republicans and even some Democrats seem to have for the constitution and the rule of law, including cause and effect and the vicious cycle even talk of preemption starts and justifies to no end.

Check these quotes out: Bush accused

* I won't go on about what other so-called pundits or dittyheads suggest. But italics are added as a hint of modification to which I add: begins at verifying and checking and balancing accountability, way before any more trusting of the administration.

ON THE OTHER HAND: Holding Spot wise...[As in Don't let the dogs out... of the dog house. I will hold a spot here for later modification of another link THINK PROGRESS trend 08 / my running list
see below.

Seattle Viaduct Ballot: 4 results? Way to go!

Ironically not just a ploy for local content, I was reading up on the Viaduct plan even though I am an eastside resident and noted the phrase You win some, you lose some there are now more ways to go. [TOWN HALL VIADUCT FORUM 7PM THURSDAY]

The important thing is that Republicans can never say Democrats don't have any plans. We may have too many, and that is just where it starts. There are needless to say Democrats as the state, county and local levels and then there are the interests of the people as they see them whether they live in the city or even travel there, or not. The mixed message or results are explained by one word: Democracy. While it ain't pretty, it is better than most alternatives, which are usually some version of tyranny or anarchy, either of individuals or groups, combined with a lack of respect for any structure or rule of law or process.

It is only natural that with two options on the ballot, there could still be a problem if neither win, both win or they split the ticket and not the fare. There are valuable opinions at every level and the people are a part in sorting things out. Politics and economics are likely to still be on the table where there can still be trouble or more hard work which Democrats will be glad to do while Republicans will likely reap the fallout for their political and economic coffers.

All Politics is Local?

If you participate!
[Whether you are Blue, Red or Green or other part of the spectrum. Purple or Violet? OK I won't go there, on and on with the spectrum of possibilities that is. UPDATED: 7:42 PM This section and a bit of editing below.]

[3-15-07: Rachel Maddow guest: Tony Morello Axis of Justice .org]

This is a holding spot for a local progressive link, which will focus on how you can participate and how I will adjust the focus here. It should be obvious that this is mostly about politics, and mostly my context if not content. The following may evolve but for now, here is a spectrum of groups I have placed in some sense of order:

Northwest Progressive Institute:All Politics is LOCAL
Just Foreign Policy
Progressive States .org
Center for American Progress
FIREDOGLAKE / BLUE AMERICA: Umbrella

The sense is mine and I have hinted above, but the key perspectives or priorities are Local, Justice, States, National and the Goal. Now, the image that America is some semblance of a Democracy and a Republic, not just the parties, and the need for grass roots and an umbrella to protect us from the trickle down and improve what we power up.

LOCAL CONTEXT:[2:59 PM]
Senator Oemig's Bill
I'm Not a Lawyer but...
Ehren Watada's Case

LOCAL MEDIA: [3:01 PM]
Progressive Talk: AM1090
Local NPR: KUOW
Seattle Area Radio

LOCAL EVENTS: [3:05 PM]
CRABFEED

Don't forget to navigate labels. Explained a bit here.

LOCAL EXAMPLE: [4:03 PM] "gives reasons" Navigate comment as well below.

Slip of the tongue [2.]

I was going to be facetious and say in the tone of an Ed McMahon rejoinder to Johnny Carson: "I did not know that" instead of Slip of the tongue [2]
But
Bush as made some progress in candor at a Press Conference.

There were two exchanges that seem to bring light on our problems more than Bush or the Press apparently know. Emphases added for focus.

ONE:

THE PRESIDENT: I can say with certainty that the Quds force, a part of the Iranian government, has provided these sophisticated IEDs that have harmed our troops. And I'd like to repeat, I do not know whether or not the Quds force was ordered from the top echelons of government. But my point is what's worse -- them ordering it and it happening, or them not ordering it and it happening? And so we will continue to protect our troops.

TWO:

THE PRESIDENT: It's an interesting question. One of the problems -- not specifically on this issue, just in general -- let's put it this way, money trumps peace, sometimes. In other words, commercial interests are very powerful interests throughout the world. And part of the issue in convincing people to put sanctions on a specific country is to convince them that it's in the world's interest that they forgo their own financial interest

Two brilliant examples where congress should take charge of their powers[the purse, war and treaty] that we address concerns like these at home before they become questions of foreign policy and the press refocus as well.

Special thanks to Rachel Maddow for covering things that are important. While I heard these earlier in the day, yesterday, and then found the sources.

Spare the Rodney!

"I get no respect"
That is what the troops can say.
But who also gets no respect?

To put it plainly, lawyers and politicians have been the butt of jokes for quite some time, but it should be noted that "we the people" are the real bottom line.

What does this have to do with the issue of supporting troops? Talk is cheap, lives are dear. Law and politics should have the highest priority because of this connection. And that was not even where I started out on this course. My intention was to show that when all is said and done it matters who is in charge. So even behind what some say, what they do will be different. Context is always important, who says what is also important, but who is leading and who can follow it is the key.

It is too much to ask that those that disagree just shut up, but that seems what some are doing, without having the guts to even stay the course of saying it.

The point I can't put too plainly is that whatever is said, the context of who said it is important but that even different players taking the same course could do a better job, but it could be more important avoiding them.
[update beating around the job]

Slip of the tongue?

Barack Obama apologized for remarks about "3000 lives of the bravest young Americans..."

NBC co-host Campbell Brown on Today should apologize for what "it's difficult to say..."

In context? The media should apologize for the slip of coverage for Bush slips and who says what. It's not easy - to say?

Special apologies(rrrr Thanks) to Media Matters , for their work is not easy.

Speaking of hard work and supporting troops and saying it, the link below has an interesting week of saying it.

Use of Labels

This is just a note that labels are not always useful.
[liberals, conservatives, progressives, neo-cons, communists, fascists]
However, LABELS as they are used below, may be helpful. The previous post includes the addition of the "label" ESCALATION but could be used for almost anything the administration does. At this time it places a focus on world powers and how they get along. The Geometry of Purpose? label refers basically to a structure of how to get things done. For example; focusing on one's own intentions from the grass roots up, not trickle down. Hence the Power Broker Mountain Project. This post is to explain some of the workings of this writer.

Trivium, for example represent the basic medieval course work at universities: grammar, logic and rhetoric. You can see where I am coming from and where we are going. Quadrivium is the upper division of the liberal arts composed of; arithmetic, geometry, astronomy and music.

Example of their use: Fuzzy Math and Fuzzy English = 1 heckuva result *

I will add to this post later, but another feature that I have just begun use of, is the search engine for the blog itself.(Just demonstrated click on heckuva) I will be inserting labels on previous posts, and clicking on them below will bring up that label's postings.

Bonus: LINK requires "Hard Work" of reading and more importantly filtering.

* in case more of a hint is needed, sometimes I am a hechuva speller as well.

You win some, you lose some.

Six party talks have reached an agreement over North Korea's nuclear program.

While Putin's harsh talk is straight from the soul.

And China tests it's own satellite defenses.

Reagan said, "Trust but verify", Bush had only to look into a soul and test the limits of trust and verification. Meanwhile, China and Russia are making progress in areas beyond our military-industrial complex.(Definition 7 or 8?)

Unfiltered Richardson.

"The New Realism and the Rebirth of American Leadership"
Governor Bill Richardson speaks at "Decision 08" before the Center for Strategic and International Studies[Proactively Bipartisan]

In related issues: I added the following comments to Senator Kerry's efforts.
More than a deadline...
Take war THREATS off the table!
See www.justforeignpolicy.org
Investigate the use of intelligence and hold the U.S. administration accountable to the constitution and international law. Hold the military-industrial complex accountable to the purse of congress and the people.
Back to the "Unfiltered Richardson" it is for you to read. But just from the introduction I note his background that attacts me. He is the firt to accept their invitation. Currently Governor of New Mexico and won 69% of the vote there. Former Secretary of Energy, Ambassador to the U.N., and member of Congress.

UPDATED LINKS[2-16-07]:
CAMPAIGN
Governor
CSIS TV

Senator Oemig to Petition Congress

State Senator Eric Oemig gives his reasons for pursuing accountability of the Bush Administration.

Articles of Impeachment and more info.

More on the Senators "hard work".

Even Republicans Support Impeachment

Obama goes for it.

I have an Audacity of Hope, not the book yet, but that we will have a great race for the next president of the United States.

[9:05 AM - follow-up]
There are rumors and I will let you google them, that Obama and/or Clinton will skip early primaries and debates. I will comment based on these rumors alone. Skipping a primary is just about how much time and money goes into a state. It should obviously not mean they are not on the ballot. Skipping a debate though is a matter of concern. Getting your ideas out and sticking your neck out is suggested, and not doing so is highly suggestive.

Trivium

At this point, now that we are really moving forward by looking back, I have begun the process of inserting labels on earlier posts* and Trivium is a recent word I learned and my first application is NO JOKE. Quadrivium is a later joke. But I assure this is no joke, and in fact pertinent to our course and our corrections.

*[Minor editing as in punctuation are also being done in this process of assigning labels and putting titles to their proper place.]

Impeachment Proceeding In Washington State

State Senator Eric Oemig of the 45th Legislative District
has agreed to sponsor a resolution to impeach President Bush
in the state legislature in Olympia.
There was quite a turnout at the announcement in Bellevue today.

The four articles which have been proposed:
1. Illegal wiretapping
2. Lying to Congress to initiate a war of aggression in Iraq
3. Torture and extraordinary rendition;
and
4. disdain for LAW and checks & balances

I may add that when Bush was running the 1st time he commented that when it came to legal technicalities he would let his conscience be his guide, and he has operated under that philosophy ever since.

The recent Watada mistrial should make it clear that when there was an agreement on the "stipulation of facts" but not on whether that was an offense or a defense AND it was also determined that the legality of the war upon which the Lieutenant used his conscience as his guide was not a matter for the military court, then it must have a hearing in congress if not the world court. While these are different events they have similar foundations.

The Constitution

I'm not a lawyer but...

my post on Lt. Watada's "Unbecoming" Mistrial seems to have gotten to a point that others seem to run around. [Breaking Related News * ]

Here is the crux of the matter:
"...the military judge, said the case could end in a mistrial if Watada’s lawyers refused to let the defendant answer the judge’s questions about potential inconsistencies with a "stipulation of fact" that Watada agreed to before the trial began. "

"The defense has consistently tried to call into question the legality of the war, because Watada said the war is illegal and a command to fight in Iraq is also illegal. But the judge has said the argument over the legality of the war is not a matter that can be settled in military court." *

Note that a crux must have two lines. It seems that the case cannot proceed under the "stipulation of fact" that the prosecution prepared and the defendant agreed to, yet the judge felt had inconsistencies that he expected the defendant to clear up and was not for the court to decide.

Later reports seem to confirm this thinking even without necessarily getting to that point so easily. That's what I am here for, even if an occasional misspelling or misthinking is occasionally caught. At least it is not as bad as the misjudgement that brought us here. Not that there will not be calls to stay the course.

By the way, is that not another error or actually what we should be doing? I may not be much for grammar and neither is "The Decider", but what we seem to have here is a missing preposition. We have never been on a course but it must be stayed. It may be a "Catch 22" or the "8th Wonder" but there is often a missing link and sometimes you have to follow them.

* [IMPEACHMENT EFFORT: see link go to February 1oth on calendar]
In my view, this is where the matter lies.

Senate Resolution.

Just say no.
Just say support the troops.

Neither will succeed unless something is either not done or actually done, rather that just saying.

After that the rest of the words are important too. The obvious difference being if you are also saying that supporting the president is supporting the troops. Then even the saying is once removed from anything or even nothing being done.

That is my "post-emptive" take on an airing of the recent failure in the Senate to vote on a resolution, for which I have not attached a link. But here are signs of progress from 7 Republicans.

By the way, another speaking out of class or beyond my pay grade which for these matters is zilch, but I believe that contrary to the above thinking the Republicans are actually getting things not done by not talking. I believe that by requiring a cloture* vote they are actually filibustering a vote, possibly without the talk. But of course it is more complicated than that, and of course political. Surprise, surprise. The irony is that the Democrats have agreed to debate some resolutions and the one they disagree with hearing is redundant and all of them non-binding, except to the effect on the war and the purse, which is their job.

*cloture is not the word here but Senate Rules that apparently require 60 votes under some circumstances or that they cannot even agree on them

Lt. Watada: "Unbecoming" Mistrial

“Very interesting" Oops, wrong accent or show.

“I see nothing" from Hogan’s Heroes may be the one I was stretching for.

My commentary has to do with whose perspective or spin is taken off from. As in “here comes the judge": "saying the soldier did not fully understand a document he signed admitting to elements of the charges." And this take from other participants .

My perspective? Should not intention count? And what was the intention of the war? And can this ever stop spinning if "intention" is not on the table, but the war was all about preemption of intentions. I am not sure just who understood what about the charge but the defense put it all on the table, and it was "not a matter that can be settled in military court."

NOT A MATTER THAT CAN BE SETTLED IN MILITARY COURT?

I believe that the 1st and 3rd bold are from "Laugh In" or similar times, but that is not to make light of the seriousness of our "defining" times, as in Bush's ideological run around the dictionary of about all that matters.

But as you can see from the vision thing, it may not work if you focus, and I could be wrong about the links. NOT EXACTLY BUT...

NOT A MATTER? THERE IS NO OFFENSE IF THERE CAN BE NO DEFENSE.
Ow! The irony of circular intention or "the yellow brick road". Or maybe it is that there are only three branches of government and conscience is where principles are found or lost or the battle ground we should be on.

Course Filter!

[Or finer filter file]
A funny thing happened on the way to this breakdown.

I was going to adjust my processing or filing routine and here is where I will leave it for now. TWO LINKS OR NOT TO READ! (in fits and starts is how this should read maybe, but my concern was that "OH NO!" what is this email from some organization.

Well here goes the rest of the course.
[Two links from that email.]
http://www.americansforhealthcare.org/
http://www.americansforhealthcare.com/bhctprinciples.cfm

As I began this filter I was barely into the filtering myself but after putting it down or rather cut and pasting and transferring to a file I read the second and found out the who. It does not matter, or does it?

The principles are the start. And just because some are seemingly on the "other side", that does not mean that all and more do not need to participate. So if you are a Union Hater or a Wal-Mart Hater, drop the hate and lift your mind to the possibility, but you must be a part before you can turn down the filter.

Maybe in conclusion for now...
A dialogue broke out
While I was just on the way to file it.

Swift Reading!

"Is Growth the Be-All and End-All?

Exactly.
Exactly.
Exactly.

The economy is neither.
(Grammatically I am uncertain if a comma is needed or where, or if none is more to the points.)
Meaning it depends on perspective, not to mention choice of words, and sometimes two are not enough and one too many.

Where am I going? Exactly. Well not to be redundant, but...

Where have we been? Ourstory.
THAT IS TOO THE POINT.
Exactly and NOT.

* * *
Tangent or more to the point later and backing up to the present, I used to label such work QCON (Quick Comment On the News) , the N could stand in for nuts, or where it leads or where they come from, but I segue now, to the point. Good Piece! Despite my preemptive take on it, meaning, I have not finished or even read too much of it, but am sticking my preemptive neck out. But here is the catch or rather another perspective that I have applied the same methodology as well as possibly the subjects. That is somehow seeing between the leaps that others make or seeing that they have leaped to or fro a starting point, as well as what got us here.(Ourstory) [grammatical note: yes "fro" as in... well suffice to say I did edit check the sentence a time or too, and let it stand.]
But one point, whether the chicken or egg:
Hmmm? (dot, dot, dot) or rather

Well... based on a mistaken impression found in search of "be all and end all" the following came up. In furtherance of my methodology it could be labeled "Course Filter".
Course as in navigable and holey. Or wholly and holy.

But again I tangent to a possibly better place, whether by intention or error this may be the point. Given that I was not sure of this path but the point I used to get here was in my mind presumptive or nonetheless a found by a search.

This may take a reread and result in no recourse but at least it is not swift boating or hit and run. ID the future or id the future or the exception proves my rule. The search is ours.

One fifth too many.

As in two sheets to the wind. Or is it three, but I won't push the drunk metaphor.
But whatever happened to the Fourth Estate? Now we have a fourth branch of government?
Whenever one gets too drunk for power you will find a fifth.

DC contractors are reported to be the fourth branch while "the press" has been neglected as an estate that merits some notice in "the will". While it is not just a case of follow the money, it could be a case of passing the buck in checks and balance.

Congressional Oversight Needed!

To clarify the intentions of our laws.
Executive Order Expands Presidential Power Over Agencies
truthout.org : TheNewStandard :
The same old course. Deregulation of regulation.
"guidance"?
Here is my comment "out of the blue" so to speak: They got caught on Iraq, they got caught on signing statements, they got caught on the Plame blame and now the only buck to pass is to save some cash. It may seem innocuous enough, "Clinton did it", but give an inch, they take the Nile. Actually they have not really been caught, they just shift their banks... Hmmm. Meaning there is still a fight to be fought, if they can't have it over there, it is at home meanwhile.

ACCOUNTABILITY!
The executive branch is charged with administering the laws not making them. If they are not clear enough, then there needs to be more laws. Not an independent department of market forces.

Now my "out of the blue" was actually brought to the ground, what really came to my mind from above was this:
Market forces do not supply needs! They only supply value to wants and balance others. I don't know who said that but I am pretty sure someone should have. If not, it should be decreed, and get on with the job of government.

Molly Ivins is remembered and not coincidentally her writing also found in the link Accountability above at Bush the Unitary!

Biden- Off Course.

Well, it was really my oops: as I said to someone this morning that he would not last long.
That is not the oops. As he opened his bid with poorly chosen words on Obama.

The oops, was my quick comment on the news, that I thought I was already right, as I heard the teaser on the Ed Schultz Show.

[Running List 08]

Epic Olbermann!

Re:Cyling the Course:
Bravo! or rather TruthOut and MSNBC!

This movie is worth watching again: The Olbermann piece, not the President's speech.

I would like to add to the script though:

Not only was the President's account of the war on terror fanciful, and 0 for 4 in his claims; but there is even less proof that these have anything to do with him and things having changed since September 11th, 2001 or whether there would even be that tragedy if such similar episodes had been followed. Meaning that there is not only little demonstration that such recent "terrorist acts" were very far along, but that his signing statements and the patriot act were at all necessary to prevent them or whether existing laws were the weakness before September 11th.

Watch your screen for Jaws III or is it the Screams.

The Stick and the Carrot? POWER OF WILL?

Let Senator Spectre speak, and Senator Feingold carry the stick. The stick is the carrot that fills the will.

THANK YOU, RACHEL MADDOW
[ a tangent from her view of Spectre, as "speaking strongly and carrying a tiny stick" and the metaphor came to my usage today, on the whole gang, but here is what may be better filter in my search, not necessarily an endorsement , but a great idea: Even the counter intelligence can leak a point, meaning you cannot sue the president, but you can Impeach, subject dropped, but you can sue departments, and they are adding a crew there now.]

There is no one decider. There are three branches of government and the law is in the hands of the legislative with the power of the purse and war. The great decider may be above, but the great interpreter is not just the judiciary. Justice and the law must be above all, and we are all under it. To heck with the geometry, but is the will of the people, despite what will has been flip flopped. Not that any people are above the law, but must be part of the higher goal than just the process, or just below the process.

So speak softly and carry a big stick, but do not speak of the stick, but consider the carrot, if you talk preemption it is too late.

GWB: Global Warning Bull [do not misread: Warning, with an NNNNNNN!] * See Comment by me.
This portion is a tangent returned to from the arc above.
Congress investigates MisLeaders[Thank you, Waxman]
Here is the "be all and end all" from a Re:Cycler (aka: Deceivers Institute).
The point? Being. Not the end all or who peers over who.

Air America Radio - Moving On!

Buyer Found
Al Franken Leaving
Joe Liebermann Independent

Congratulations Air America Radio for finding a buyer, Al for his contributions past and future and Joe for not jumping on a bandwagon. (my attempt to relate to something) Stephanie for waking me up, and Thom Hartmann for getting Al's Air

Thanks to Air America Radio and the Stephanie Miller Show on AM1090
She woke me up to checking into 2 out of the 3 as I recall.

Kucinich Lays Out Anti-War Strategy Just a tangent from out of the blue.
Actually thanks to the Liebermann link and Yahoo! and yes Stephanie "he has a plan".
Or rather yes George, "he has a plan". Edwards Down, Hillary - Up 2? <-Vilsack not. Meaning Edwards and Vilsack are taking more forceful approaches and Kucinich has a plan and Hillary is being pragmatic. Now force is not the problem but context is, especially in anything on the road to the last resort. Politics is hard work, diplomacy harder, mixing them the trick without flip-flop. Some of these positions may need more unfiltering of the nuance involved as media filters tend to, by nature of the word "filter", segment. But preemption can not work without furthering preemption of all, and it would be better to clarify a position and change when needed.

Out of Line? "Hogwash"

Cheney with Wolf Blitzer is on course. McCain and Cheney must stay the course so that the rest have a line to hit and run from. [The Situation Room]

[submitted from an email exhange]

... looking into the matter more fully myself. [Watch Cheney's response to questions about his daughter] I'm afraid I can't characterize the players the way others would.

[[ I "fundamentally disagree" with Cheney, and agree with Wolf that it was a "reasonable, fair question." It was a poorly framed question ending with, "Do you want to respond to that?" Cheney replied: "No". And before Wolfe could rephrase or follow up, Cheney interupted him with his response which I firmly believe was out of line. ]] *

On the whole issue of fair play I agree with your so called "naive" view but it seems more to my point, which I won't jab at again. [but the quote was from "Focus on the Family"]

The whole "Situation Room" is suspect in my book for having any of the Cheney's on. It must be for ratings or to serve the purpose of media whipping boy.

http://thinkprogress.org/2006/10/30/lynne-cheneys-slapdown/

The old saying "if you can't stand the heat" sure takes on new meaning these days. http://www.bartleby.com/59/3/ifyoucantsta.html
When it comes to an interview we should all be served.

By the way, from the transcript p.6 (third from last paragraph): "Well, Wolf. If the history books were written by people who are so eager to write off this effort or declare it a failure, including many of our friends in the media, the situation obviously would have been over a long time ago." This is some piece of rhetoric which if it says anything seems to endorse my theory on the "Situation Room" if not that others could and should be in "the kitchen".

Roger

P.S. Did I start this? Sorry. Really, remind me.

* The bracketed section was inserted last as I seemed to be less than straghtforward in that area. Then I decided to read the whole transcipt but could not. It was out of line 2 1/2 pages into the 9 1/2 page PDF. It is a shame that this distracted from what was more of the same.

[ A full read of the transcipt seems to support this surmise, and today even the senior Bush has joined the chorus about the media being "out of line"(in other words)]

MAD: formerly know as...

MUTUALLY ASSURED DESTRUCTION

now as MAINLY ACCEPTED DECEPTION:
[this material was sent out 1-19-07: link at bottom found today]

There are too many potential links to alert you to, but the above should hit the mark. The point is do we intend to move forward or are we going back? Nuclear Proliferation seems the height of counter productivity in the so called new world since 9-11. It is not just MAD but INSANE and that stands for nothing, but where we are headed. That may be the real point of their madness. Hit and Run, somebody wins but what?
But I high-lite more of my own links and my own model, which is not just the fanciful reconstruction of ancient thinkers but what has always been the project for debate and what power too naturally denies.

http://political_progress_for_people.blogspot.com/2007/01/just-thought_17.html

"Just a thought" can be punctuated several ways, but "Just" is more, than just assuming that things are "old" or "new". Just is the purpose of our constitution, the only thing the president is sworn to defend. "Just" is the project our founding fathers settled on in it's words and even the preamble gets lost in the difference between needs and wants.

http://political_progress_for_people.blogspot.com/2007/01/running-list-and-reference-links.html

http://political_progress_for_people.blogspot.com/2007/01/hit-and-run-gang.html

These links bookend the long and short of it, and hopefully will be of help, but the point I will end on is how can we expect that a "War on Terrorism" will be at all successful if offense is not just the last resort, but their only plan to end it, while avoiding the law is their first and last concern?

Andi Parhamovich

AIR AMERICA LOSS
About the hard work.

More than that. Thanks anyway.

The Hit and Run Gang

and the book ends of history or
THE CON-TEXT : (The Pinnacle? 1-11-07)
[from which I resubmit the following segment on my tetrahedron of being, to give context to the book ends and book marks, and why history will be not only rewritten but replayed.]
THIS MATERIAL WAS NOT ORIGINALLY SO CONTEXTED: [Comments and links added.]

* * * * * * * * *
[Now another spin-off.][From http://www.commondreams.org/views07/0105-26.htm ]

A Platonic(Model) Narrative? Or Being the Narrative?

Politics, Physics, Philosophy and Psychology may be the four points but politics may be the pinnacle. The pinnacle could be considered by some to be a W as well, and certainly by the current president. But the reality is that We are all susceptible the behavior, thinking and feeling that We each are the pinnacle and the Power. But W can also stand for the Wonders, the Words and the Works, not to mention the We that is too often denied. For many W is only about the Win, but it can’t be without the We, or it is just about the One. It may just prove the legitimacy of this model, that one cannot be without the rest.

Then I read:
http://www.commondreams.org/views06/1222-24.htm

* * * * * * * * *

There are several F words that can also be applied, freedom is the force that must have a form that must not be feared. A W which may get too much neglect is the want, while others emphasize it. It is all about what "I" want, while there are more "I"s neglected. The power of our ideas, our intentions, and our ideals.

Running List and reference links

[Update: 8-13-07 only the link has been added]

[IMPORTANT UPDATE 3-29-07]
FOR PRESIDENTIAL PROFILES
GO HERE

[I will here update(3-17-07) the running list, without explanation but with a more inclusive link: Think Progress Trends
Kucinich
Edwards, Richardson, Obama
Clark
Dodd
Biden
Clinton ]


Democrats in '08, my original list

New York Times List

The Frame? "Hit and Run"...with a bang and the buck!

The Philosophy !

Just - A Thought. The links there are about the Attorney Generals unified philosophy, replacements at Justice, Absolute Power, physic of Iraq history, and the geometric irony of military approaches alone.

Just: a thought. Justice is the point of the constitution*, and life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness is our project, not putting wants over needs.

* links will be amended here without dates, except for this post any editing of my other posts will be noted in comments. The first four posts above will remain intact, and the index will flow from there: note that there are Just - A Thought & Just: a thought are intentionally puctuated differently-- just a hint.

Just - A Thought

Just a rap on "activist philosphy"
Just the starting point.
A just goal?
Just the gravity?
Not just the Triangle or vicious cycle.

Just: a thought.

"Fair and Balanced" does not mean having an opinion and getting a reaction, and possibly having an answer. There is the second opinion and possibly a third, that is just the start of getting somewhere which is a fourth perspective. That place is where we are going, and where we are coming from encompasses how to get there. These are the minimum vectors which are not just quadrants, for any geometry of meaning also entails a geometry of purpose, which again must be approached from at least these points. The purpose for some may be the action, for others simply the reaction.

The possible purpose at this point is that having a plan that is bad, but does not require forming another to stop it. It also points to the problem of the first plan, being simply an action or a reaction, but more honestly a pre-action that had it‘s own points that need checking. The charge that there is no plan to replace the bad plan, does not mean that the latter must move forward or will ever move us forward. That is the loop that simple action, reaction or even pre-action will not solve, without work on more points and plans and even the end point.

Just in case anyone wonders, a good starting point, has been the constitution. The three branches form an equilateral triangle, the point being the law. The press being the light needed to see their actions and all points between. Some would say, "the truth will set us free", others just "shut out the light". The purpose is freedom and the powers need balancing or the point will be what we get.

Martin Luther King, Jr.

Peace: Martin Luther King Jr.’s work.
Or the vicious cycle. Cultural Tangents:
Naturally roots and branches, not points, planes and circles.
Geometry of Purpose.

[Note: 12-28-07 On this day I have created the label WholeE Day I have removed the inoperative work link.(see loopy comments not touched]]

My Responsibility.

This is a segue* into my noting that it has not been the practice here to faithfully note any holidays, despite the occasional remembrances I have been reminded of or wished to make comment on and remember. Today is the day to remember Martin Luther King, Jr. One reason may be that some people become icons, and some events bring pain, but neither should be reason to not wish that his words be more remembered. Another reason may be that some words are hard to put any better, but all must be taken in their context.

* referring to my apology for not noting it earlier

Hope? Under Cover of Denial.

"they could try to stop me"
To Congress "Bring Em On!"
This is another one of my preemptive reads, [First Read] ...(not even clicked on) where I am giving my take based on a glance at the headlines and little more than what Air America Radio or the local paper provide. Which is probably a bit more than Bush reads, but he does say that they(the media) are a filter and I am sure he filters much of what he gets from his "objective staff". The second hope (the first being "they" do) is that there will be more diplomatic results:
Rice to attend Israeli, Palestinian summit
Secretary of state hears demand for stronger U.S. push on Mideast peace

But as I must go back, as I promised, to add links connecting previous takes, I will go straight to the point. Is the president attempting to implement all the suggestions of the IRSG under cover of denial for political gain? Or is he attempting to implement an Iran strategy under cover of politics for the security of the country? Denial of politics is not what I am talking about here in that politics must play a part, but the part that must be focused on is the goal and that and it's parts are still cloudy.

Diplomacy under the cloud of offensive measures, even under cover of defensive needs, is no excuse for not uncovering what our goal really is. Actions speak louder than words, but words must begin to be trusted, then verified by both sides, whether between nations or branches of government. The "unified executive" here and the "unity government" of Iraq, must be scrutinized, especially under the light of the cloud they like to place over the United Nations and international "law".

War Powers

Since there is debate as to whether the power of the purse is needed to force the president to the will of the people. There seems to be a more preemptive step. Since the Authorization was based on flawed intentions, and the president still confuses the war on terror with the reasons he went in to Iraq, the latter must be clarified by congress clarifying their constitutional power to declare war. They should also use extreme caution of the purse on intelligence, since the president's war strategy is preemptive, his power of intelligence is preemptive. Congress must use the power of their intelligence and the purse of intelligence to preempt what is the reason that others can only preempt by fighting, since diplomacy is only seen as a tool to rally others to our interests. That also must be in the equation as to whether our interests are any different than others. Congress must retrieve their power of war and the power of the purse, and cannot without the power of intelligence to work toward clarifying what our interests are and if the president has intentions to protect them or continue to just react to others who can only assume.

[added 11:52 PM] Thanks to Just Foreign Policy for filtering this Brzezinski piece Five Flaws in the President's Plan from the Washington Post and these two action items:
Ask Pelosi & Reid to block the escalation in Iraq Link for contacts.

Call the Senate: No to the Escalation Senator's Kennedy's legislation would block the President's plan to send more troops.
Congressional Switchboard: 202-225-3121.

The Pinnacle?

[The following is just a few short pieces that spin off from some other material.]
[From an email:]
From January 4th, 2007
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

[OR BACK FROM THE PRECIPICE:] (posted and re-titled 1-11-07)


BY THE WAY: (Not Buy the Way)

Politics, Physicalities, Philosophies and Psychologies seem to fit my tetrahedron of how things work, but being unbalanced or in denial of their part in the whole may be why we are where we are and keep getting where we've been. This is my just honed perspective of a model and I must remember that that is all it is, but that it needs work. (The following reflect parts of the puzzle, and spin off from my post today.)

Hiding Behind the Straw Argument

Resolved?

[Now another spin-off from: For America's Sake.]

A Platonic(Model) Narrative
Or Being the Narrative?
Politics, Physics, Philosophy and Psychology may be the four points but politics may be the pinnacle. The pinnacle could be considered by some to be a W as well, and certainly by the current president. But the reality is that We are all susceptible to behavior, thinking and feelings that We each are the pinnacle and the Power. But W can also stand for the Wonders, the Words and the Works, not to mention the We that is too often denied. For many W is only about the Win, but it can’t be without the We, or it is just about the One. It may just prove the legitimacy of this model, that one cannot be without the rest.

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.

Straw Elephant

Misery Loves Company
Or Day Late and a Dollar Short?

So much has been made of the pre-emptive leak that there will be a troop "surge" that it almost overshadows the rest of his potential plan. But the possibility that there are a "few good" ideas are overshadowed by the increase in "a few good men" and women. My pre-emptive take on the former is dampened by the pre-emptive reaction to the latter. My pre-emptive cynicism has taken the biggest hit, but here is my take nevertheless.

Whatever the reasoning behind the "escalation" there is always hope that it will work. However, there is more likelihood that it is just a form of "cut and run". It is more than the concept that we must "support our troops" which does not entail agreeing with the president, but that there is emotional strength in numbers in that they support each other. But it must be remembered that the president is the commander-in-chief in that he is responsible for the plan. The possibility that he will not be allowed to carry out his plan, lays the responsibility on congress where it also belongs, in their job of holding him accountable. That is the job that the voters have chosen the Democratic Congress to do, based on the president’s record and the rubber stamp his party has given him.

With all the hope for success and support for the troops always there, it is difficult to say that this is probably the ultimate cut-and-run. For if the president does not seem like he has a plan, there can be nothing for Republicans to cut-and-run from to cover their past, not to mention move forward on. The Democrats have the job to correct the past, and make sure it is not repeated, but Republicans will gladly settle for passing the buck, with an appearance that they are not as united as they were. This takes an old saying into a new camp, from "divide and conquer" to divide to run. There is something to be said here in that Democrats are divided to unite.

Where "fair and balanced" means putting up a straw dog, against a straw issue, there is a lot of "hard work" sorting the many positions and potential solutions to any problem. Is there irony or extreme congruity in the image of former Democrat Ronald Reagan and a 20-mule team not to mention the Borax needed to come clean?

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?

Hiding Behind the Straw Argument.

The Republicans these days have rarely met a straw argument they could not hide behind and not incidentally which they have not created.

Actually these patriotic tough guys haven't the guts to face real issues head-on without hiding behind the way things don't work. This is an approach that should have been seen through since before the start of the war, but here is a point blank charge that must be on the books and runs through my blog.
Iraq War Lie Detector Test thanks to Dean Baker, truthout/columnist

TheLiaisonReport concept is that WE and our Representatives should see the real issues and what can really be done and not fall for pre-emptive and quite plausible incompetence.

[Links will be added to track back the points I have touched on earlier.*]

Post-post:
Before I worded the above post I has stumbled on a link on Nancy Pelosi's 100 Hours and afterwords(i.s)* I found The New Extremists, both for review later. These reflect two more aspects of this blog, looking back and looking forward, and reading memos before or after understanding their headlines. The administration walks this tight-rope for political gain, while disrespecting politics itself. There is nothing wrong with politics or partisanship, there is a lot wrong with denying them and claiming that there is simply a third option that we get to or from somehow by magic.

*
[However the latter section above was posted within the half-hour of the original and "i.s." means intentional spelling, another aspect of my work that is not always intentionally reflected in that my miscreation of words are not just a third perspective but a potential if not natural blend of what was also noted in earlier self-references to my work as Running With Rhetoric, along with an image of Bush running with scissors from the world post-9-11.]

One more on 100 hours: from TomPaine.com

"Truthiness" of Ranked Words.

Banned Words are listed by a Michigan university, and those words in the headline itself are tongue-in-cheek as in not really the truthiness. But "truthiness" did rank(def. 9) in their rank(def. 19 or 24 slang) of words. It was however honored as "the word that best summed up 2006 in an online survey by dictionary publisher Merriam-Webster."

Congratulations to my name sake, Stephen Colbert of The Colbert Report, or rather his choice of name as the inspiration for my choice of The Liaison Report.

Speaking of words (and I suppose purists would say writing of words), as the year closed I thought of the origins or my rank of a few words.

"Bush Basher" and "Context".

And since 2006 was about change of course, I will MoveOn for the moment and pick up this track in the next post.

A belated HAPPY NEW YEAR, but I feel we turned a few pages before the last closed.

Parting Words

Meaning and, not versus.

Bush:

The key to success in Iraq is to have a government that’s willing to deal with the elements that are trying to prevent this young democracy from succeeding.

That’s the whole meal deal, not the beef.

Belated words and belated farewell.

Above, Below and Betwix the Filter

Good News!
Warning: slightly tongue-in-cheek.

Iraq and Iran
Rice on Iraq:

"worth the investment"

Rice on N. Korea:

"They’re signed on to denuclearization," in an agreement last year that was never implemented. "We’ll see whether or not they follow through," Rice said.

Rice on Iran:

She said she is confident all U.N. members will enforce the sanctions once passed, no matter how they voted.

I filtered the grains of Rice that reflected some hope or catch. On Iraq it is just the choice of the word "investment", not what they actually invest. On North Korea it is "whether or not they follow through", and on Iran it hinges on "sanctions once passed".

North Korea

Here the grain is at the bottom of the filter:

American and North Korean experts had separate talks on the financial issue this week in Beijing, but made no breakthroughs and were tentatively set to meet in the United States next month.

Here is the best news for Bush yet.

Seriously.

Preempting Irony or Rerunning Cycle

Support for WMD
Historic Hoax
A link worth consideration and a rerun worth seeing.
The irony that keeps the vicious cycle not winning, not losing.
Going after the WMD.
The smoking gun in the name of prevention now in corporate hands.

No Comment.

The End of Pax Americana.

Once, Twice, Three Times A Charm

This could be referring to the trilogy of wars, but it is more about the times needed to read the article about the Google of Intelligence.[not a number]

To be more direct, the three wars I don’t mean are; Terrorism, Iraq and Iran; the final yet to be. I would have said Afghanistan, but it was more legit. Not that the war on terror is not legit, just that the definitions and terminology still need to be fought. But I did read the link three times, with some distractions, but it really does smell like a rerun.

My point is that the purpose for which the State Department sought intelligence was to prepare a list of individuals and organizations for sanctions, without providing any real link to intelligence.

Those with the most hits under search terms such as "Iran and nuclear," three officials said, became targets for international rebuke Friday when a sanctions resolution circulated at the United Nations.

The bonus feature may be that if they provided the link, it may show that there is not enough to go on. So to avoid the previous problem of "flawed intelligence", the solution is to not provide any, but approve other’s intelligence which do not have a direct link.

None of the 12 Iranians that the State Department eventually singled out for potential bans on international travel and business dealings is believed by the CIA to be directly connected to Iran's most suspicious nuclear activities.

"There is nothing that proves involvement in a clandestine weapons program, and there is very little out there at all that even connects people to a clandestine weapons program," said one official familiar with the intelligence on Iran. Like others interviewed for this story, the official insisted on anonymity when discussing the use of intelligence.

The irony is that there was plenty of "open source" intelligence available before this disasterous course unfolded, much of it filtered here.

One connected dot further: intentions, preemption and their denial are the greatest hazzards to navigate, but one thing is certain, they may be connected, but they can change, and one side always knows the truth, whether it is your's or not.

Now I know it is not just me that can't be direct, but that has no bearing on the reality.

Iraq Study Group:

Bush has read?
My pre-emptive read is Bush was right.

"it will be up to future presidents"... or some sort, don't hold me to the exact words, but Bush must be held accountable.

We must not cherry pick from the recommendations but let Bush do his job, and each branch do their jobs: the legislative and the judicial.

If he cherry picks then each recommendation must be fought over, otherwise known as dialogue, or debate, and investigations must move forward as well as back.

Quick Comment On News (QCON)

Parliamentary considerations of Blair/Bush consult.

Iraq Study Group: Long Story Short

Much ado about change.

"...diplomatic offensive..."

(link corrected:12/7)
[See Comment for continuation]
(link added: 12/8)Executive Summary

Tear for Fears!

His
Mine...
Bush in 'O8?

After a quick glance at the article I was going to call this "a quick shot in the dark" but I sensibly self edited. It is not really a long shot, and the tears were probably compounded by the contrast to the Bush of '06.

It is none the less in their hearts and minds and should be in the picture of what to fear and prepare for. The Bush Legacy.

Blame to go around?

Taking off from a Stephanie Miller topic in the background as I check the news on the internet, the topic of always having someone to blame was noted. From a Larry King show, Dennis Prager jumped on a question about the difference between Republicans and Democrats. His answer resulted in laughter, and so near the end of the show. Republicans he said are the party of "American Exceptionalism", and Democrats are the party of (blah, blah, blah...) something about "old Europe" or the French. What I am saying is that his definition of Democrats was not too clear or important, unless you take it to mean OUR ROOTS, OUR PRINCIPLES!

Now "American Exeptionalism" is not a bad thing, unless you forget that just what he forgot is important. We do have an exceptional history, and we do have exceptional potential, but we also have an exceptionally hard job, not to forget where we came from. But unfortunately by forgetting that, only the idea that we have some exceptional authority remains. That is probably where the laughter resulted. We know that for the administration and it’s defenders, they are the exception to every rule but theirs. [see footnote later]*

Whatever Stephanie Miller was talking about, sent me on the tangent and I will try to revisit the show, but it seems that the above can be tied in somehow. Always having someone to blame when things just do not go the way they are decreed. I had more to go on this, but maybe already got there. Something about the "hard work" that remains. We know that war is "hard work" and they said, "War is a last resort", but the hardest work is not getting there.

That is the irony, that there is always a last resort to resort to, if things don‘t go your way. But for us there will always we hard work, because that is what makes us exceptional.

And if I may depart on the note of an ancient comedian, "take my wife"...She might say: "Right, there is always hard work Left."

[ I was actually going to go into a more logical tit for tat on the difference between who had what to blame, but maybe I present a better demonstration of someone getting where they don’t know their going. Some just don’t want to say. Then they can declare victory when they finally define the mission.]

* [I know this seems loopy, but "I am the uniter, not the divider" said Bush. Now we know what is unified and he is the decider.]

NOTE: It is the opinion of many that Wikipedia is not necessarily the authoritative source, and I agree, but that does mean it is without a value that may just be academic. NOT!** Another little loop here that is closed by their own admission. Which is what is in dispute: authoritarianism.
LSS:[Long Story Short] We are the decider as in a government of by and for the people, with three equal branches, each having their own hard work, separate and related to others.

** Another little demostrative irony here is that "academic" has it's own loopy history, in that one can almost see, how others may be getting it. It is the process not the end all. [Epitomized by the dispute between practical and authoritative not to mention reality.]

Running List '08

[2-16-07: links added Richardson,]

[2-11-07: Coarse Filtering]- Richardson
Kucinich
ObamaClark
Edwards
Clinton
Vilsack
Dodd
Biden
(note: I will let the above typos speak for themselves as a filtering of sorts)
- - -
[original listing]Edwards
Clark **
Kucinich
Vilsack
Dodd
Biden {2-1-07}

[2-1-07]
This is only an order based on my obtuse criteria:
Kucinich
Richardson
Obama
Clark
Clinton
Edwards
Vilsack
Dodd
Biden




[added 1-18-07] I will footnote at the bottom but re-arrange the above evolving list, comment will appear in dated order below. Not that my feelings count and I have not investigated all these candidate yet but they are my current priority.

The "running list" will reflect consideration sometime of only one issue in prioritizing them, but they are probably all good. One issue alone could also put things in reverse order, for all I know Vilsack could be best. This is only an explanatory preface, hopefully not an attempt to cover myself. ***

[Original entry]
Vilsack

[added: 1-16-07 ]
Kucinich
Exploratory Committee:
Obama

[added: 1-17-07 ]
Edwards
These are in no particular order, I will comment on that later, but at this time Obama is in his exploratory phase. In the previous election I sent my first email with comments to the Kucinich camp, and continued to forward and Cc: each candidate till I arrived at my choice. Then I reviewed the candidates at Backbone Campaign * to rethink things . My choice was Howard Dean. Well it makes me want to scream as we know how that ended, but now we can scream because we know where we are, and Dean is the head of the DNC. I did not really plan to post this much now, but we have much more of a road to hoe, and I really don't want to jump on a bandwagon, and would really like a 20-mule team of great candidates so that we can sort things out even more, so that we don't have more wars and a president who is finally ready to feign dialogue while demanding a plan from the opposition. This is not a call for a plan or opposition, but to look at what each says and does. I did not really plan to go on this riff either, but just tossing things in the air, Edwards is a candidate I had enthusiasm for based on past considerations. But I look forward to processing all of these great candidates who are so good, I almost refrained from comment so far...

[added 1-18-07] Dodd a candidate long overdue, but too long?
Republicans ? **** and wannabes?

* [added 1-18-07] I will keep this * at the bottom as it will footnote here that this link does not have the presidential candidates yet, or needs to be changed.

** Obama will be left off until he declares, here Clark is inserted for Hope sake. For history sake I note the original five candidates in this order: Edwards, Clark, Kucinich, Vilsack, Dodd

*** I will not alter footnotes, comments will be inserted just above these footnotes, link below and others will be improved with time.

**** MoveOn.Org in this link is labeled a liberal group. I do not consider that it's draw, but was the forefront of pragmatism and progress that heralded the likes of Howard Dean.

Bolton Resigns as UN Embassador!

A Suprise?
"...at a time when the White House was making dramatic moves with respect to it's Iraq policy, this is a significant development."
Oh, the irony in parsing this. The emphasis on "significant" or the term "dramatic", are a close call.

This is not only a quick filter, but saves me the filtering of several links on the Rumsfeld memo. That ties this up, while we see what develops.

[See comments] for timing on added links:

Rumsfeld memo.
Murtha on memo.
Both videos.

Finally: Long story short: How we got here. The point: Not seeing the big picture, let alone connecting dots.
[Note: This last link not fully read, but a glance makes it my point of departure for my tangent or with my comment attached maybe truly a triagulation.]