Hating to generalize I note my potential logical fallacy in the following. Nevertheless, between the 2nd amendment and the 14th amendment, there seems a hierarchy for some. From Right to Bear Arms to Citizenship Rights where does the 1st amendment fit in? (*)
A. There is no hierarchy in constitutional amendments.
B. There are Supreme Court rulings that influence their dynamics.
C. So many blogs are moot points. (GOTO 1st sentence)
Of course maybe my posts are just moot or problematic. Problematic in generalizing and leaping. Unfortunately you must read, to decide. In generalizing there may be some association between the authors of certain events but not necessarily relevant. In the above case I simply point to fact that removal of citizenship is being considered for some but not their guns, while free speech is an element that might be fringe but relative. Meanwhile in an earlier and adjacent thought, some of this new found legislative fury seem like WMD.** Weapons of Mass Distraction. It would seem that all this populist rancor is really keeping Homeland Securiy busy. And while I support all rights reasonably used, I cannot help but feel that it really is a burden on our security. A bit more responsible reporting and responsible associating might help, but then how one goes about that...almost makes me long for a unitary executive. BTW: the dot, dot, dot was a rhetorical segue or moot question.
My potential obtuseness was not an attempt to be excedingly careful***, yet the cause and effect might be anachronistic(i.e. flip-flopped). The links to previous word choices were not intentionally designed to be more than a search for my previous usage, but they do seem to bring up some previous associations which show the importance of the process and progress, not to mention providing hope.
(*) an alternative link.
(**) not that early: My first referencing of Weapon of Mass Distraction.
(***) but maybe an antidote to some talk show hosts that muddle the search for terrorist
[Oh, and I do not vouch for the legal analysis or terminology in my ABC's. And had not intended to close with the SCOTUS link when I set out. Let alone the less than inflammable association with security. But it does seem that it is wierd that flammable and moot have similar usage issues as does the roots or branches of Faust, let alone Devil's Advocates. But no, that is the legal process, not to mention political, and word and world modifying dynamics, or as I have stumbled out(or coined) "dymanics". I will conclude with the issue that there was some Beckian confusion in the topic of a National Prayer Day in regard to what was canceled and what is being fought and by whom. But the ideas which Thom Hartmann yesterday contrasted was a National Day of Reason to share and balance the National Day of Prayer. While I suggested a National Day of Faith. But would that be legal? Not without debate, moot and inflammable or not.]
Friday, May 07, 2010
Wednesday, May 05, 2010
Waiting in the Wings.
[Update: 5-6-10 Here**] This is to note that I have a few spots and comments under developement in draft. In particular something on the issue of news/web coverage (so called Journalism) and it's sometimes too fast pace or poorly prophetic & preemptive coverage.
Meanwhile I just read this and don't recall if I had linked it as a to read or saved for reference* or loose link.
* a look at my posting dates indicates the latter
P.S. The NYTimes of course has it's cynics, while I hope CSM doesn't need more critics.
[**]5-6-10 regards saved in draft(now posted) as wise move and error to be followed up.
Meanwhile I just read this and don't recall if I had linked it as a to read or saved for reference* or loose link.
* a look at my posting dates indicates the latter
P.S. The NYTimes of course has it's cynics, while I hope CSM doesn't need more critics.
[**]5-6-10 regards saved in draft(now posted) as wise move and error to be followed up.
53 Hours*
[POSTED 5-6-10: This item was saved in draft as noted, and it was a wise wing walk **. I am no longer puzzled but will draw more from draft, and leave leaking the tangents below.]
I am still puzzled about a CSM article.
Truly Horizons that need updating somewhere apparently and ironically.
P.S. my Wave Label has not been kept up(clearly) although the con text has advanced in other 4mats and meta4s.
* pun on "24 minutes" (yes I believe I heard that) but I am sure it was just a misspeak. Yet I am doing as they say**.
Sub Text: Hint Gulf Leak Submission?
Not to mention NBC ad re Fox: and Cheney's Gulf Golf/Gee Oh Me Try and Newtons Fig Tangent. Olbermann Pushed On NBC! Cussing The Riggers. Fig'N Calculus But it is more personal than that.
[Posted as is, date & time reflect first draft.]
I am still puzzled about a CSM article.
Truly Horizons that need updating somewhere apparently and ironically.
P.S. my Wave Label has not been kept up(clearly) although the con text has advanced in other 4mats and meta4s.
* pun on "24 minutes" (yes I believe I heard that) but I am sure it was just a misspeak. Yet I am doing as they say**.
Sub Text: Hint Gulf Leak Submission?
Not to mention NBC ad re Fox: and Cheney's Gulf Golf/Gee Oh Me Try and Newtons Fig Tangent. Olbermann Pushed On NBC! Cussing The Riggers. Fig'N Calculus But it is more personal than that.
[Posted as is, date & time reflect first draft.]
Tuesday, May 04, 2010
Monday, May 03, 2010
FAUX CULTIAN?
Pop Culture [*] and big Do Do!
[Source threads: [A], [B].
[I should note that I have not even caught Mad Men or The Wire but they might be following us and I allude to the deeper threads, which just might hinge on the word reconstruction as much as deconstruction.]
[Hint: "PC" is a Beckian tangent(wisecrack or side crack), while "Do Do" is a mess age we are in and must "read" as "well/to do". P.S. not pronounced "doh, doh" but that is another tangent or non-dough dew.]
[P.S.2.0 my "original intent" was to avoid "a ribble", but it could be unavoidable without a revamping of Keynesian economics or at least an imparting of Try-Go-No Metrics.]
* Update 5-6-10 P.C. Explained see Hint link added under "Beckian".
[Source threads: [A], [B].
[I should note that I have not even caught Mad Men or The Wire but they might be following us and I allude to the deeper threads, which just might hinge on the word reconstruction as much as deconstruction.]
[Hint: "PC" is a Beckian tangent(wisecrack or side crack), while "Do Do" is a mess age we are in and must "read" as "well/to do". P.S. not pronounced "doh, doh" but that is another tangent or non-dough dew.]
[P.S.2.0 my "original intent" was to avoid "a ribble", but it could be unavoidable without a revamping of Keynesian economics or at least an imparting of Try-Go-No Metrics.]
* Update 5-6-10 P.C. Explained see Hint link added under "Beckian".
Friday, April 30, 2010
For Words!
4 the People
2B Partisan or a Different Club?
This is more of a play on words and numbers, than a criticism of a candidate or a system, except to point out the differences. Florida is a Closed Primary, meaning (I assume) an independent runs only in the General Election. Washington is an Open Primary in this case only the top two vote getters regardless of party will be in the General Election. (I won't get into the British system.)
(Embedded within are the links to particulars in regard to Washington candidates challenging Democrats while in Florida, the big news is that a Republican governor has decided to run from the party the tea partiers have taken over. I have almost considered it a Rovian calculation for them to run from their party. There is the theory of the two Santas, so running against a strength, would that be the two Grinches* theory?
* radical independents supported by divide to revive...the right.**
(In a bigger picture look at this, the difference is truly the pressure of politics which is valid. In Florida a survival of a moderate candidate for senate in the form of the current governor, and in Washington; pressure from the left on moderate or progressive candidates, but with different electoral processes.)
** more on the two Grinches, not to despair valid Tea Party issues but to the money and support that lumps or divides them
2B Partisan or a Different Club?
This is more of a play on words and numbers, than a criticism of a candidate or a system, except to point out the differences. Florida is a Closed Primary, meaning (I assume) an independent runs only in the General Election. Washington is an Open Primary in this case only the top two vote getters regardless of party will be in the General Election. (I won't get into the British system.)
(Embedded within are the links to particulars in regard to Washington candidates challenging Democrats while in Florida, the big news is that a Republican governor has decided to run from the party the tea partiers have taken over. I have almost considered it a Rovian calculation for them to run from their party. There is the theory of the two Santas, so running against a strength, would that be the two Grinches* theory?
* radical independents supported by divide to revive...the right.**
(In a bigger picture look at this, the difference is truly the pressure of politics which is valid. In Florida a survival of a moderate candidate for senate in the form of the current governor, and in Washington; pressure from the left on moderate or progressive candidates, but with different electoral processes.)
** more on the two Grinches, not to despair valid Tea Party issues but to the money and support that lumps or divides them
Thursday, April 29, 2010
Back Log and 4 Mat
Hit and Run Republicans, simply reflects the open field and many tents in which leadership is hard to locate. Not exactly hit and run, but more like running from various factions and issues.
As projected now by Chris Cillizza or 2B soon [*], but here is the point of my format. Democrats as well have their wings, but the political calculus depends upon whether there are closed or open primaries, especially when it comes to independents and progressives verses(sic) tea partiers** and disappointed liberals, not to mention the fluid* or radical moderates.(not to overly characterize)
[Hi! See Noon? Or midnight sessions where "Senate Republicans use the rules to stop things, Senate Democrats are going to use the rules to keep everybody working late."]
*pun on the oversea's similar difficulties and disappointments and party electoral process differences.[***]
** no disrespect but there are at least two major factions I call the Palin and Paul wings, both uncertain about whether they are running for or from the Republican Party.
[Teeter Totter? Gamble and Investments.]
[***] Not so puny. Plus it was only natural google that(or which) intersected the links.]
[*] 4wards ho!
As projected now by Chris Cillizza or 2B soon [*], but here is the point of my format. Democrats as well have their wings, but the political calculus depends upon whether there are closed or open primaries, especially when it comes to independents and progressives verses(sic) tea partiers** and disappointed liberals, not to mention the fluid* or radical moderates.(not to overly characterize)
[Hi! See Noon? Or midnight sessions where "Senate Republicans use the rules to stop things, Senate Democrats are going to use the rules to keep everybody working late."]
*pun on the oversea's similar difficulties and disappointments and party electoral process differences.[***]
** no disrespect but there are at least two major factions I call the Palin and Paul wings, both uncertain about whether they are running for or from the Republican Party.
[Teeter Totter? Gamble and Investments.]
[***] Not so puny. Plus it was only natural google that(or which) intersected the links.]
[*] 4wards ho!
Updates A and B
A: A Modest Proposal [The Spectrum War] David Brooks
B: Bail Out of Day Oh. (or earlier)
[Bailout Bail Out Beatle Juice!]
[C: Suddenly Nuanced and subtle segment of email rant: But down to the legal ease or difficulty of writing laws... I have barely attmepted to read the Arizona bill, but it may be in the process of evolving itself. My real point is that short laws are not really good laws if they have to be interpreted to be enforced. This hits the nail on the table of the Palin Paul Pup Tents in the Republican Bail Out from Responsibility. I mean they whine about too many laws(and pages), and hang on the "original intent" of the constitution, and then pass a law that needs more work and interpretation. ...to say the least.]
B: Bail Out of Day Oh. (or earlier)
[Bailout Bail Out Beatle Juice!]
[C: Suddenly Nuanced and subtle segment of email rant: But down to the legal ease or difficulty of writing laws... I have barely attmepted to read the Arizona bill, but it may be in the process of evolving itself. My real point is that short laws are not really good laws if they have to be interpreted to be enforced. This hits the nail on the table of the Palin Paul Pup Tents in the Republican Bail Out from Responsibility. I mean they whine about too many laws(and pages), and hang on the "original intent" of the constitution, and then pass a law that needs more work and interpretation. ...to say the least.]
Wednesday, April 28, 2010
A Modest Proposal
Bail Out in Con Text: Sub Title Meants.
In the two word culture sometimes words are only half meant anyway, that means the two words are lucky to be one.
Democrats run to govern: BAILOUT.
Republicans govern to run: BAIL OUT.
[Representation without Taxation an Update? Not to mention the OK Choral!]
[Added 4-29-10: Speaking of Embattled Or Flew Id Metaphors, The Spectrum War or Milk Toast Middle. I hate characterizations but when they are characters it may be OK, Brooks is a mild-mannered intellectual version of Glenn Beck with delusions of balance. Or to use his words aimed differently, he "wittingly or unwittingly"..."created an impression of federal onslaught." ]
In the two word culture sometimes words are only half meant anyway, that means the two words are lucky to be one.
Democrats run to govern: BAILOUT.
Republicans govern to run: BAIL OUT.
[Representation without Taxation an Update? Not to mention the OK Choral!]
[Added 4-29-10: Speaking of Embattled Or Flew Id Metaphors, The Spectrum War or Milk Toast Middle. I hate characterizations but when they are characters it may be OK, Brooks is a mild-mannered intellectual version of Glenn Beck with delusions of balance. Or to use his words aimed differently, he "wittingly or unwittingly"..."created an impression of federal onslaught." ]
Friday, April 23, 2010
Representation without Taxation...
or emmigration without documentation.
OK, they probably have documentation, but for example: how did GM get to pay off their bailout with foreign profits when their bailout was probably needed due to the emmigration of profits? I put it better, when I signed the petition. Oh, it started with the suggestion that Arizona officials pullover all suspicious looking corporations for documentation.
[Speaking* of lede'r$hip?(or slip around 1:05) *go2 comment one]
* Update 4-26-10 Asterisk, bold and link added.
[Update: 4-27-10 Not an endorsement nor full read of Arizona Bill 1070.]
OK, they probably have documentation, but for example: how did GM get to pay off their bailout with foreign profits when their bailout was probably needed due to the emmigration of profits? I put it better, when I signed the petition. Oh, it started with the suggestion that Arizona officials pullover all suspicious looking corporations for documentation.
[Speaking* of lede'r$hip?(or slip around 1:05) *go2 comment one]
* Update 4-26-10 Asterisk, bold and link added.
[Update: 4-27-10 Not an endorsement nor full read of Arizona Bill 1070.]
Too Seriously Ponder?
Steve Clemons blasts Senator Schumer for going public with an issue of foreign policy and international consequence. It's called free speech and politics, but that does not mean that a deeper look and lesser mingling is not called for.
Thursday, April 22, 2010
The Hartmann Award.
HA! The Hartmann Award: It may not be DHA(daily) but here is the 1st, Under-reported Progressive Action of the day. Thanks to Thom Hartmann, and McClatchy News.
Happy 40!
Earth to People.
11thHourAction
Local
Wishing all a heavily nuanced day!
[To Read] [To Link /Interactive?]
[Get Caffeinated Here]
[To Un-Thrasymachate or Detergiversate, Independents need to get pumped.]
[HA! Hartmann Award: It may not be DHA(daily) but here is the 1st, Under-reported Progressive Action of the day. Thanks to Thom Hartmann, and McClatchy News.]
11thHourAction
Local
Wishing all a heavily nuanced day!
[To Read] [To Link /Interactive?]
[Get Caffeinated Here]
[To Un-Thrasymachate or Detergiversate, Independents need to get pumped.]
[HA! Hartmann Award: It may not be DHA(daily) but here is the 1st, Under-reported Progressive Action of the day. Thanks to Thom Hartmann, and McClatchy News.]
Monday, April 19, 2010
Left Behind
Legacy?
Warren or Koh for Supreme Court?
"This Will Be Obama's Legacy."
Mine will be to better read*. But I did entertain thoughts that the seemingly disenfranchised left merge with the Tea Partiers to come together on the populist issues that might make for progress ala Ross Perot or Ron Paul. Not that I would fall for such a pipe dream or policital calculus of hope.
* or weave?(comment there)Manicean TriUnism? Two Reeds?
[Yet! On the other hand!]
Warren or Koh for Supreme Court?
"This Will Be Obama's Legacy."
Mine will be to better read*. But I did entertain thoughts that the seemingly disenfranchised left merge with the Tea Partiers to come together on the populist issues that might make for progress ala Ross Perot or Ron Paul. Not that I would fall for such a pipe dream or policital calculus of hope.
* or weave?(comment there)Manicean TriUnism? Two Reeds?
[Yet! On the other hand!]
Sunday, April 18, 2010
Friday, April 16, 2010
Punderous Ponderings
Thursday, April 15, 2010
R not, R2, R not, R2, R2, R not.
Are Democrats taking bipartisanship off the table?
Thanks to Stephanie Miller:
Austin Goolsby BTW: Not recovery-dot-com but maybe commerce.gov?
Timothy Geithner
Huffington Post.
[Earlier thank you, Rachel Maddow . Also... you can't handle the truth!]*
* wikispoiler? who gets it [**]in the end?
[** Obama Won(R2D2), Go for it, Get Over it, Toy Story. Punchline: Who writes your stuff.]
Thanks to Stephanie Miller:
Austin Goolsby BTW: Not recovery-dot-com but maybe commerce.gov?
Timothy Geithner
Huffington Post.
[Earlier thank you, Rachel Maddow . Also... you can't handle the truth!]*
* wikispoiler? who gets it [**]in the end?
[** Obama Won(R2D2), Go for it, Get Over it, Toy Story. Punchline: Who writes your stuff.]
Saturday, April 10, 2010
The Under-Stans
We have not yet begun to read.
Not necessarily yet even need to?
The under lying principle* is what and who are you fighting for? Background: JPJ foreign born "America's first well-known naval hero during its Revolutionary War, and later served in the Imperial Russian Navy."
Foreground: see above to read and note the geography and political and historical nature of the support for regime change. More specifically so far, our administrations support in the past for the political situations in other countries and other countries changes in political situations. Not to imply the forceful or violent nature of certain parties, but the over standing of rhetoric in too many situations.
No Pundit Stand, or Cause Ick Stand, But Cure G stand? If we work on where we stand.
* or is it rhetorical or a question?
[No offense to Stans or any other entities or groups.]
Not necessarily yet even need to?
The under lying principle* is what and who are you fighting for? Background: JPJ foreign born "America's first well-known naval hero during its Revolutionary War, and later served in the Imperial Russian Navy."
Foreground: see above to read and note the geography and political and historical nature of the support for regime change. More specifically so far, our administrations support in the past for the political situations in other countries and other countries changes in political situations. Not to imply the forceful or violent nature of certain parties, but the over standing of rhetoric in too many situations.
No Pundit Stand, or Cause Ick Stand, But Cure G stand? If we work on where we stand.
* or is it rhetorical or a question?
[No offense to Stans or any other entities or groups.]
Thursday, April 08, 2010
Close Enough for
Government Work?
The Leviathan.Not Exactly.
But well put.
The next small step?
Old style?
[I am unable to retrace the techo-cultural trip that landed me on the Ed Woods production but it was a tangent from Pop Culture entertainer Glenn Beck.]
The Leviathan.Not Exactly.
But well put.
The next small step?
Old style?
[I am unable to retrace the techo-cultural trip that landed me on the Ed Woods production but it was a tangent from Pop Culture entertainer Glenn Beck.]
Calvin...
and Hobbes or
Pee Wee Pulpit?
[Infinity in Retrospect] i. e. "and back again"
Re: Ribble to Read? See Obsolescence.
[To the heart of the matter... see "also"@who knows!]
My direct meaning is that if they read the full context there is nothing to fear but fear itself, but that brings back Roosevelt too clearly for some. Even if they don't like either Teddy or Franklin speaking of Red.
Pee Wee Pulpit?
[Infinity in Retrospect] i. e. "and back again"
Re: Ribble to Read? See Obsolescence.
[To the heart of the matter... see "also"@who knows!]
My direct meaning is that if they read the full context there is nothing to fear but fear itself, but that brings back Roosevelt too clearly for some. Even if they don't like either Teddy or Franklin speaking of Red.
Not Exactly
Random (not so) links:
Beck Ed:
Bachman Palin Express How's that new normal working for ya?
the Apostle Paul in letters
Cognitive Policy Works?
Obsolescence?
Of hate or humor?
Media Matters?
As a personal recipient of the Palin humor or bumper sticker advice, I have a suggestion: advice does not fit on a bumper sticker and apparently not even in your rallies.
Less than raw links:
catharsis
RE:Schadenfreude
Gloom at other's successes.
Raw links:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Epistle_to_the_Thessalonians
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2+Thessalonians+3&version=NIV
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Who_was_Paul_in_the_Bible
http://www.gotquestions.org/twelve-apostles-disciples-12.html
http://sunandshield.wordpress.com/2007/08/04/is-the-apostle-paul-one-of-the-12-disciples/
* in the particular case I am a minority (OK, I did not take the poll, but it is hard to believe it is representative of the truth. That would mean a thumbs up for the media, and I don't know what for congress.) But that is really cherry picking.
[Speaking of Bridge or post lonesome roads or sections of a train?.]
Beck Ed:
Bachman Palin Express How's that new normal working for ya?
the Apostle Paul in letters
Cognitive Policy Works?
Obsolescence?
Of hate or humor?
Media Matters?
As a personal recipient of the Palin humor or bumper sticker advice, I have a suggestion: advice does not fit on a bumper sticker and apparently not even in your rallies.
I was at a metered on ramp and a white SUV was aside me, with the character driving smiling and speaking through my slightly open window on a beautiful day. As I smiled and rolled down my window, he said: "How's that hopey changey thing working out for ya?" (To be honest I am not sure that he or I now have it correctly spelled or quoted.) I flashed an even bigger smile and a vigorous thumbs up, and he continuted: "Are you a commmunist or do ya just vote for them?" To which I replied: "Are you kidding or(?)" ...we moved on. But that guy did not know who he was messing with (someone who knows better*)... someone with a sense of humor and a sense that righteousness is a lack of faith. (I just came up with that, as I really had some wise cracks, some even appropriately expletive(Tea "partier")adjusted. Speaking of what's in the bag. I have mysteriously completed a loop as to who or what is working? I will call that my Ribble of Intelligent Design at which I will give the links by number.{It might take a while to sort out the serious, but I do emphasize the jest or just nature, rather than any unintended vitriol(wiki google branch: ethereal.) or Con Sequences. See Comment.]
Less than raw links:
catharsis
RE:Schadenfreude
Gloom at other's successes.
Raw links:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Epistle_to_the_Thessalonians
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2+Thessalonians+3&version=NIV
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Who_was_Paul_in_the_Bible
http://www.gotquestions.org/twelve-apostles-disciples-12.html
http://sunandshield.wordpress.com/2007/08/04/is-the-apostle-paul-one-of-the-12-disciples/
* in the particular case I am a minority (OK, I did not take the poll, but it is hard to believe it is representative of the truth. That would mean a thumbs up for the media, and I don't know what for congress.) But that is really cherry picking.
[Speaking of Bridge or post lonesome roads or sections of a train?.]
Monday, April 05, 2010
Water Under The Bridge.
Russel King's: An Open Letter to Conservatives.
(two links same letter)
Previous Ripples?
Waves to Come?
(Too much to filter.)
[Retrospective same day,
The Ed word of the Day: regime
(OK, I don't have words of the day...) But I would like to note that "regime" is not necessarily a bad word, as a form of government, ours is based on the constitution, but for some[*] it is an ideology and even that is a double-edged word. But who started it and how's it welt?]
[In modern usage it was the one of Bush's illusory excuses(Regime Change) for the invasion of Iraq, co-opted as a political call for his ouster by the left.]
[*]the seed of this was The Ed Show...
(asterisk and comment inserted 4-6-10)
[...which later germinated on Countdown.
Speaking of Ideology not quite "out of the blue", but confidently out of the red.]
[for some, "some people" are their sources which translates "some say"(i.e. opinion) to "news". Not O'Really]
(two links same letter)
Previous Ripples?
Waves to Come?
(Too much to filter.)
[Retrospective same day,
The Ed word of the Day: regime
(OK, I don't have words of the day...) But I would like to note that "regime" is not necessarily a bad word, as a form of government, ours is based on the constitution, but for some[*] it is an ideology and even that is a double-edged word. But who started it and how's it welt?]
[In modern usage it was the one of Bush's illusory excuses(Regime Change) for the invasion of Iraq, co-opted as a political call for his ouster by the left.]
[*]the seed of this was The Ed Show...
(asterisk and comment inserted 4-6-10)
[...which later germinated on Countdown.
Speaking of Ideology not quite "out of the blue", but confidently out of the red.]
[for some, "some people" are their sources which translates "some say"(i.e. opinion) to "news". Not O'Really]
Friday, April 02, 2010
The Best of Intentions...
Are No Joke!
Not to pick on April Fools, but I had no intention of marking yesterday (the first.)
[Comments On Yesterday's Case Study.] [**]
[Please note that my third link (there) was inserted after the call for "All on deck"... And know(I mean, NO!) I did not start it. Maybe the Bee Gees started it... But I will reiterate a word of caution on the "punc" link, while endorsing the "irony" message. "He ain't heavy..." and in closing note that the "truthout" under "Headlines" questions the Newsweek cover claim which is worth a read, which I am still amidst.]
[I am trying to unribble[*] this. I am still amidst reading the Newsweek article embedded in the first link, and look forward to the Nation project, but reiterate caution on "Master of Puppets" head banging, but soundly endorse The Hollies, "He ain't heavy..." Also the Bee Gees was a last minute insert.]
[*] in this case unwind some meaning or links
** maybe the law of unintended consequences kept me from adding comments for the time being, on my previous post.
[On the other hand. Here is to popping*** culture.]
*** Jon Stewart takes a whack at CNN and other AprilFools, which I cannot be certain the date of and needs an "expletive deleted warning".
Not to pick on April Fools, but I had no intention of marking yesterday (the first.)
[Comments On Yesterday's Case Study.] [**]
[Please note that my third link (there) was inserted after the call for "All on deck"... And know(I mean, NO!) I did not start it. Maybe the Bee Gees started it... But I will reiterate a word of caution on the "punc" link, while endorsing the "irony" message. "He ain't heavy..." and in closing note that the "truthout" under "Headlines" questions the Newsweek cover claim which is worth a read, which I am still amidst.]
[I am trying to unribble[*] this. I am still amidst reading the Newsweek article embedded in the first link, and look forward to the Nation project, but reiterate caution on "Master of Puppets" head banging, but soundly endorse The Hollies, "He ain't heavy..." Also the Bee Gees was a last minute insert.]
[*] in this case unwind some meaning or links
** maybe the law of unintended consequences kept me from adding comments for the time being, on my previous post.
[On the other hand. Here is to popping*** culture.]
*** Jon Stewart takes a whack at CNN and other AprilFools, which I cannot be certain the date of and needs an "expletive deleted warning".
Thursday, April 01, 2010
Case Study
Headlines under question(marks)!
Some filter so other don't have to?
Please read, as I haven't yet.
CAUTION: Sarcasm warning! Or as "some people" might say "nuance"? Or was that missed metaphors* or hypocrisy or as I noted "equivalence"** as a challenge in this revolving rhetorical not revolutionary world?
* more likely sloppy punctuation, or logic and grammar?
SUBSET OF CAUTION: I make no equivalence, Google found these Trivium, and the punc is likely too heavy metal or irony?
** just posted "saved in draft"
[There are deeper and lighter case studies, but they are under investigation if not pending prosecution.]
[No Teaser but Prophetic? But dig that Newsweek "V" of triumvirates, the deck of emergence is at least missing the "mark"(?) as in Rand(y) Childish Partiers. I used to be overly sceptical(and ahead of the curve) in the area of Mainstream Media, especially more so in print(I won't mention the big 3) but their first initials are N,T & U or is it nuts? But they are just playing to the market yet the fair-E tale is always in the making. All on deck, even if you have a couple(decks) or are missing a few cards, they just might be only the jokers.]
Some filter so other don't have to?
Please read, as I haven't yet.
CAUTION: Sarcasm warning! Or as "some people" might say "nuance"? Or was that missed metaphors* or hypocrisy or as I noted "equivalence"** as a challenge in this revolving rhetorical not revolutionary world?
* more likely sloppy punctuation, or logic and grammar?
SUBSET OF CAUTION: I make no equivalence, Google found these Trivium, and the punc is likely too heavy metal or irony?
** just posted "saved in draft"
[There are deeper and lighter case studies, but they are under investigation if not pending prosecution.]
[No Teaser but Prophetic? But dig that Newsweek "V" of triumvirates, the deck of emergence is at least missing the "mark"(?) as in Rand(y) Childish Partiers. I used to be overly sceptical(and ahead of the curve) in the area of Mainstream Media, especially more so in print(I won't mention the big 3) but their first initials are N,T & U or is it nuts? But they are just playing to the market yet the fair-E tale is always in the making. All on deck, even if you have a couple(decks) or are missing a few cards, they just might be only the jokers.]
Wednesday, March 31, 2010
Equivalence
Principles:
a run on in other words.
Especially important in the rhetorical fields or disciplines.
[posted pre-post 3-1-10]
a run on in other words.
Especially important in the rhetorical fields or disciplines.
[posted pre-post 3-1-10]
Tuesday, March 30, 2010
Speaking of Fudging?
or dot, dot, dot!
This is a bit fringe!
And a bit of a bloomin' concern and not to mention more grown up*attention.
* updated this link today
[Miscellaneous links hotlinked 3-31-10]
Rhetorical
Charges?
Reported
links?
loopiness?
MSNBC guilty of fair and balanced, Radigan guilty of equivalence.
This is a bit fringe!
And a bit of a bloomin' concern and not to mention more grown up*attention.
* updated this link today
[Miscellaneous links hotlinked 3-31-10]
Rhetorical
Charges?
Reported
links?
loopiness?
MSNBC guilty of fair and balanced, Radigan guilty of equivalence.
Monday, March 29, 2010
We need two reasonable parties?
Well, of course we don't.
I am being rhetorical or maybe Socratic?*
While I don't minimize a need for dialogue on what reasonable is, it might make more sense to be facitious about what a party is, let alone American or thinker.
Yes, we need parties and different perspectives, but it is hard to pinpoint the reasonableness especially in light of the media's cherry picking.
NBC Nightly News tried to make an equivalence (see cherrry picking) in the back and forth, while only a portion of Rep. Schmidt's voicemail was used.** Also earlier, Dylan *** Radigan let stand a charge against MoveOn(5:05 in) and framed the Alinsky Model(5:50 in).
* we do need more reasonableness if not even more parties, but there is also a bit of diversity within each party (or is it without?)
** the reference to a gun seems "third person" if not defensive rather than direct
(not to condone the call)
*** (same reasonableness link) also SEIU charges being still confirmed
FOOTNOTES -two previous drafts- released today.
Question Marksists!
A funny think happened...
Premptive Crack.
I am being rhetorical or maybe Socratic?*
While I don't minimize a need for dialogue on what reasonable is, it might make more sense to be facitious about what a party is, let alone American or thinker.
Yes, we need parties and different perspectives, but it is hard to pinpoint the reasonableness especially in light of the media's cherry picking.
NBC Nightly News tried to make an equivalence (see cherrry picking) in the back and forth, while only a portion of Rep. Schmidt's voicemail was used.** Also earlier, Dylan *** Radigan let stand a charge against MoveOn(5:05 in) and framed the Alinsky Model(5:50 in).
* we do need more reasonableness if not even more parties, but there is also a bit of diversity within each party (or is it without?)
** the reference to a gun seems "third person" if not defensive rather than direct
(not to condone the call)
*** (same reasonableness link) also SEIU charges being still confirmed
FOOTNOTES -two previous drafts- released today.
Question Marksists!
A funny think happened...
Premptive Crack.
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Question Marksists!
[SAVED IN DRAFT: RELEASED 3-29-10]
The marks of the mess age?
This is the editorialist's trick. And the exclamation point of "fair and balanced" FOX "NEWS"? Making a true perspective almost impossible.
The marks of the mess age?
This is the editorialist's trick. And the exclamation point of "fair and balanced" FOX "NEWS"? Making a true perspective almost impossible.
Friday, March 26, 2010
Can a "minority" be a responsible leader?
Emphasis: Question Mark!
Focus: Republicans (Exclamation: Minority Leader?)
There is irony and sarcasm in my punctuation, but reality and sincerity in my question.
Not to mention plurals and possesives(period)-or slash?
OK, I got into some messing with the marks of the mess age, but the context is something that needs work, as a sorting of the particulars and relating to the personal, and maybe I should check my dia-critical[s].*
* "s" and last two links added
Focus: Republicans (Exclamation: Minority Leader?)
There is irony and sarcasm in my punctuation, but reality and sincerity in my question.
Not to mention plurals and possesives(period)-or slash?
OK, I got into some messing with the marks of the mess age, but the context is something that needs work, as a sorting of the particulars and relating to the personal, and maybe I should check my dia-critical[s].*
* "s" and last two links added
A funny think happened
on the way to the protest.
[SAVED IN DRAFT "AS IS": RELEASED 3-29-10]
I was going to report to Media Matters Beck's use of a September 2000 clip where(at 2:07 to 2:40) he yells, "Look at this! Far Left!".
I intentionally framed my original protest(speaking of "Hot Standby" including the finger/air quotes)to Media Matters as, "MSNBC let up on Beck!" but now see my own bit too hot of a standby and oops. Incidently, not the oops noted, as that involved other adjustments to my thinking(or spelling), not the thing(sic*) intended.
OK, after yesterday's heavy linked play of words, I had better stand down a bit. BUT...
The September 2009, Pittsburgh G-20 Summit was covered, but the intention of its undercoverage is mixed. So, back to my message to Media Matters(not yet sent and still evolving):
[Sometimes oops can evolve, sometimes being right don't.]
[Or sometimes you feel like a bloomin' ...]
* flip-flop of intended spelling(this time)
** see the oops of seque(sic)[there]: truly mispelled but I may have no lemony snippets but there might be some natural snickers.
[SAVED IN DRAFT "AS IS": RELEASED 3-29-10]
I was going to report to Media Matters Beck's use of a September 2000 clip where(at 2:07 to 2:40) he yells, "Look at this! Far Left!".
I intentionally framed my original protest(speaking of "Hot Standby" including the finger/air quotes)to Media Matters as, "MSNBC let up on Beck!" but now see my own bit too hot of a standby and oops. Incidently, not the oops noted, as that involved other adjustments to my thinking(or spelling), not the thing(sic*) intended.
OK, after yesterday's heavy linked play of words, I had better stand down a bit. BUT...
The September 2009, Pittsburgh G-20 Summit was covered, but the intention of its undercoverage is mixed. So, back to my message to Media Matters(not yet sent and still evolving):
Originally my outrage was over the appearance that it was Sept. 2000, well no one is perfect. Beck still misuses the facts it seems. BUT there is an odd twist which is actually standing operating procedures at FOX. It was a G-20 Summit (2009) and the violence sprung from free speech zones, or the caging of it, so to speak. So I would hate to imagine what Tea Party events might be like if they were corralled or hurded away from a major event or prohibited from getting their message out? It almost seems like MSNBC is attempting Fair and Balanced or is it nuance?It really seems the mixed intention of the coverage or undercoverage issue fits right in with the fanning or under fanning of messages perspective, not to mention who is running or leading for what.
[Sometimes oops can evolve, sometimes being right don't.]
[Or sometimes you feel like a bloomin' ...]
* flip-flop of intended spelling(this time)
** see the oops of seque(sic)[there]: truly mispelled but I may have no lemony snippets but there might be some natural snickers.
Media Matters
MSNBC let up on Glenn Beck!
They (oops)
O'Donnell/Maddow
Speaking of seque/oops or other sources or cue.
[A funny think happened on the way to Media Matters]
[3-30-10: For the life of me, I could not figure out what the trip was here, until I'd rewoven a bit of my phrasing and links. It is also in the "journalistic" gimmick? Of teasing punctuations. Tantalizing or probing & rhetorical headlines are more "normally" ended with question marx(sic). But my finally found point was that MSNBC was slightly less than probing and maybe with too fair and balanced intentions.]
They (oops)
O'Donnell/Maddow
Speaking of seque/oops or other sources or cue.
[A funny think happened on the way to Media Matters]
[3-30-10: For the life of me, I could not figure out what the trip was here, until I'd rewoven a bit of my phrasing and links. It is also in the "journalistic" gimmick? Of teasing punctuations. Tantalizing or probing & rhetorical headlines are more "normally" ended with question marx(sic). But my finally found point was that MSNBC was slightly less than probing and maybe with too fair and balanced intentions.]
Thursday, March 25, 2010
FAUX CAMP (II)
My reason for bumping up, the extended portion of FAUX NEWS, is Rachel Maddow and the Constitution, namely the 1st Amendment,
regarding the free press, not my extended references in this blog.
NOT TO MENTION FINALLY THE BILL IS BLOOMIN' DONE>
I propose that Republicans are furthering their childish rhetoric to get attention as they are really running from a free press, in the likes of MSNBC. Not to mention the questions that they would have to face in the likes of Ed Schultz or Keith Olbermann(and Lawrence O'Donnell*). Dylan Ratigan and Chris Matthews are no slouches, but the latter is a bit too sophisticated for my taste at times.
I can understand now why Scott Brown in Massachusetts is running against Rachel Maddow since he actually thinks she is campaigning against him, when it is really he who is running on running from her.
* Lawrence O'Donnell catches the reality in this link on Olbermann's Countdown.
BTW: FOX's whole existence was built on the myth of the liberal media, aka The Mainstream Media, and it is a shame that it justifies MSNBC's approach or calling it out and calling on the country to wake-up and behave. And Lawrence, in seque[oops/Segue] to Rachel: not today, but between you and I, yes we did![oops and bold updated 3-26-10]
regarding the free press, not my extended references in this blog.
NOT TO MENTION FINALLY THE BILL IS BLOOMIN' DONE>
I propose that Republicans are furthering their childish rhetoric to get attention as they are really running from a free press, in the likes of MSNBC. Not to mention the questions that they would have to face in the likes of Ed Schultz or Keith Olbermann(and Lawrence O'Donnell*). Dylan Ratigan and Chris Matthews are no slouches, but the latter is a bit too sophisticated for my taste at times.
I can understand now why Scott Brown in Massachusetts is running against Rachel Maddow since he actually thinks she is campaigning against him, when it is really he who is running on running from her.
* Lawrence O'Donnell catches the reality in this link on Olbermann's Countdown.
BTW: FOX's whole existence was built on the myth of the liberal media, aka The Mainstream Media, and it is a shame that it justifies MSNBC's approach or calling it out and calling on the country to wake-up and behave. And Lawrence, in seque[oops/Segue] to Rachel: not today, but between you and I, yes we did![oops and bold updated 3-26-10]
Faux Campaign
versus Real concerns.
The last post was so extended I have bumped the last portion up to here:
Anachronistic bracketed and segue.
[If one could raise the level of "sophistication" and be able to cherry pick the rhetoric, one could see that politics is the only method in resolving things, even if you do not feel "responsible" for being in positions of leadership: see Ratigan reference and Hardball below.]
[*** see my call to Boehner's office not to mention what is on their "clean sheet of paper" now.]
[Earlier references to the way media works not to mention this last minute source. And later, Ratigan is a bit of a mix of "targets": see link (here)[UPDATE], from which I have pulled the term "sophistication" (above) from a Tea Party guest, even though the host, Dylan might not understand community organizing perspectives or "responsibilities" in other matters, while Hardball might raise it too well.]
Anachronistic segue.
[I will finish with two issues that could easily be too political, but would love the exact words in law, to explain the "abortion funding" and "mandate" issues relationships to reality versus the rhetoric. But I believe it is a fungible economics issue or state options and commerce clauses relationship to the foot in the door and opening the door to get the TOW out in the form of there being room for improvement from both sides.]
[Hardall, "the reality is" in the "stirring up trouble"(segment) that media focuses more on raising the rhetoric and controversy gets more attention and distracts from issues(my take not guests)] and then covering it is called "whipping it up" when to naught is only more to blame.]
[OK, I can't say I didn't "play with words" especially in the last few bracketed's]
[On the other hand, I would like to reflect the reality that Republicans will not run against reform, just more reform, and note that they must now reverse Valentine, not as in massacre but in sending messages and bills that will get attention, hopefully not from their "clean sheet of paper"(meaning not rerun or failed ideas), but incrementals that will get responded to, run on, and even occasionally get up or down votes, only not necessarily with the kind of bipartisanship and change they hope for.]
*** asterisk applies to last post
The last post was so extended I have bumped the last portion up to here:
Anachronistic bracketed and segue.
[If one could raise the level of "sophistication" and be able to cherry pick the rhetoric, one could see that politics is the only method in resolving things, even if you do not feel "responsible" for being in positions of leadership: see Ratigan reference and Hardball below.]
[*** see my call to Boehner's office not to mention what is on their "clean sheet of paper" now.]
[Earlier references to the way media works not to mention this last minute source. And later, Ratigan is a bit of a mix of "targets": see link (here)[UPDATE], from which I have pulled the term "sophistication" (above) from a Tea Party guest, even though the host, Dylan might not understand community organizing perspectives or "responsibilities" in other matters, while Hardball might raise it too well.]
Anachronistic segue.
[I will finish with two issues that could easily be too political, but would love the exact words in law, to explain the "abortion funding" and "mandate" issues relationships to reality versus the rhetoric. But I believe it is a fungible economics issue or state options and commerce clauses relationship to the foot in the door and opening the door to get the TOW out in the form of there being room for improvement from both sides.]
[Hardall, "the reality is" in the "stirring up trouble"(segment) that media focuses more on raising the rhetoric and controversy gets more attention and distracts from issues(my take not guests)] and then covering it is called "whipping it up" when to naught is only more to blame.]
[OK, I can't say I didn't "play with words" especially in the last few bracketed's]
[On the other hand, I would like to reflect the reality that Republicans will not run against reform, just more reform, and note that they must now reverse Valentine, not as in massacre but in sending messages and bills that will get attention, hopefully not from their "clean sheet of paper"(meaning not rerun or failed ideas), but incrementals that will get responded to, run on, and even occasionally get up or down votes, only not necessarily with the kind of bipartisanship and change they hope for.]
*** asterisk applies to last post
FAUX NEWS!
I'm not in the mood to play with words today.
But it is nice to see the condemnations of violence from some Republicans, while even those that have, don't recognize their part in lighting the fire by their childish complaints and rhetorical run around with the process. Their complaints [***] of not being included and their complaints of unprecedented partisanship should ring hollow, especially in light of the comprehensive compromises and early sacrifices by Democrats for the sake of pragmatism.
The media plays a big part in not better informing the people. FOX is bad enough, but there is so much reactionary programming, that might be valid yet not really enlighten us on the actual basis in fact and correcting rather than repeating. It seems that there is a political ingredient in this as well as a childish back and forth, but also a misunderstanding of the actual difference in taking responsibility* for one's words and blaming others for politicizing their misuse.
My original thoughts were in support of independent filters, or earlier links, and other sources.
Republican Whip Cantor has complaints about the DNC and the D(triple)C using the threats for political gain.** [Boehner see my comment section]
* Andrea Mitchell(MSNBC): today's link to follow (here): now can we not condone whining?(to Cantor not Pelosi)
** The DCCC have now addressed the difference as well as you (the reader) being able to see and decide in the several links, not necessarily in my rhetoric.
Anachronistic bracketed and segue.
[If one could raise the level of "sophistication" and be able to cherry pick the rhetoric, one could see that politics is only method in resolving things even if you do not feel "responsible" for being in positions of leadership: see Ratigan reference and Hardball below.]
[*** see my call to Boehner's office not to mention what is on their "clean sheet of paper" now.]
[Earlier references to the way media works not to mention this last minute source. And Later Ratigan is a bit of a mix of "targets": see link (here)soon, from which I have pulled the term "sophistication" (above) from a Tea Party guest, even though the host, Dylan might not understand community organizing perspectives or "responsibilities" in other matters, while Hardball might raise it too well.]
Anachronistic segue.
[I will finish with two issues that could easily be too political, but would love the exact words in law, to explain the "abortion funding" and "mandate" issues relationships to reality versus the rhetoric. But I believe it is a fungible economics issue or state options and commerce clauses relationship to the foot in the door and opening the door to get the TOW out in the form of there being room for improvement from both sides.]
[Hardall, "the reality is" in the "stirring up trouble"(segment) that media focuses more on raising the rhetoric and controversy gets more attention and distracts from issues(my take not guests)] and then covering it is called "whipping it up" when to naught is only more to blame.]
[OK, I can't say I didn't "play with words" especially in the last few bracketed's]
[On the other hand, I would like to reflect the reality that Republicans will not run against reform, just more reform, and note that they must now reverse Valentine, not as in massacre but in sending messages and bills that will get attention, hopefully not from their "clean sheet of paper"(meaning not rerun or failed ideas), but incrementals that will get responded to, run on, and even occasionally get up or down votes, only not necessarily with the kind of bipartisanship and change they hope for.]
But it is nice to see the condemnations of violence from some Republicans, while even those that have, don't recognize their part in lighting the fire by their childish complaints and rhetorical run around with the process. Their complaints [***] of not being included and their complaints of unprecedented partisanship should ring hollow, especially in light of the comprehensive compromises and early sacrifices by Democrats for the sake of pragmatism.
The media plays a big part in not better informing the people. FOX is bad enough, but there is so much reactionary programming, that might be valid yet not really enlighten us on the actual basis in fact and correcting rather than repeating. It seems that there is a political ingredient in this as well as a childish back and forth, but also a misunderstanding of the actual difference in taking responsibility* for one's words and blaming others for politicizing their misuse.
My original thoughts were in support of independent filters, or earlier links, and other sources.
Republican Whip Cantor has complaints about the DNC and the D(triple)C using the threats for political gain.** [Boehner see my comment section]
* Andrea Mitchell(MSNBC): today's link to follow (here): now can we not condone whining?(to Cantor not Pelosi)
** The DCCC have now addressed the difference as well as you (the reader) being able to see and decide in the several links, not necessarily in my rhetoric.
Anachronistic bracketed and segue.
[If one could raise the level of "sophistication" and be able to cherry pick the rhetoric, one could see that politics is only method in resolving things even if you do not feel "responsible" for being in positions of leadership: see Ratigan reference and Hardball below.]
[*** see my call to Boehner's office not to mention what is on their "clean sheet of paper" now.]
[Earlier references to the way media works not to mention this last minute source. And Later Ratigan is a bit of a mix of "targets": see link (here)soon, from which I have pulled the term "sophistication" (above) from a Tea Party guest, even though the host, Dylan might not understand community organizing perspectives or "responsibilities" in other matters, while Hardball might raise it too well.]
Anachronistic segue.
[I will finish with two issues that could easily be too political, but would love the exact words in law, to explain the "abortion funding" and "mandate" issues relationships to reality versus the rhetoric. But I believe it is a fungible economics issue or state options and commerce clauses relationship to the foot in the door and opening the door to get the TOW out in the form of there being room for improvement from both sides.]
[Hardall, "the reality is" in the "stirring up trouble"(segment) that media focuses more on raising the rhetoric and controversy gets more attention and distracts from issues(my take not guests)] and then covering it is called "whipping it up" when to naught is only more to blame.]
[OK, I can't say I didn't "play with words" especially in the last few bracketed's]
[On the other hand, I would like to reflect the reality that Republicans will not run against reform, just more reform, and note that they must now reverse Valentine, not as in massacre but in sending messages and bills that will get attention, hopefully not from their "clean sheet of paper"(meaning not rerun or failed ideas), but incrementals that will get responded to, run on, and even occasionally get up or down votes, only not necessarily with the kind of bipartisanship and change they hope for.]
Wednesday, March 24, 2010
On the Other Plan(s)
[Originally I was amending or running on the last link.]
...on the other hand: while I am not advocating Independents or Single Payer, they just might be the way things need to go. As the Reverend Al Sharpton said this morning, it would be unseemly for the President to be an advocate for any separate interests, as I paraphrase him, and as others would call it leadership in reference to the parade. This was linked anachronistically. Note the tetra of DRIP, (now that was manipulated: Democratic Republican Independent Progress), not to mention the Bloomin' ** Fringe. And an earlier thought about this field, Creationist Recreation Applied Properly, no CRAP. Speaking of anachronism, if someone turned water into wine, who turned whine*** into trickle down? Answer? Just a Laffer. No disrespect to the good nature and good deeds of Reagan and Nixon or vice verse us, but they have certainly been proved to be relative.]
** EPA = Expletive Properly Applied.
*** Needlessly(sic)
Underlying this thinking is a reaction to those that think we think we know better, and those that think they are we. I directly refer to the rhetoric of the Right and the fact that they are the minority for a reason, continually evidenced by their behavior as well as the fact that polls change and they had better.* Wow, I think that was anti-sic or at least freely punctuated, but who the Fringe knows or is it the Shadow or Charlie McCarthy(**)ism?
* Bold summary and link(correction: reference) to other asterisk not to mention runonwordplay.
[belated ** talk about prophetic gathering of moss I am not sure I know yet.]
[Well...not exactly, but close enough for Hurts work or Wads-worth.]
...on the other hand: while I am not advocating Independents or Single Payer, they just might be the way things need to go. As the Reverend Al Sharpton said this morning, it would be unseemly for the President to be an advocate for any separate interests, as I paraphrase him, and as others would call it leadership in reference to the parade. This was linked anachronistically. Note the tetra of DRIP, (now that was manipulated: Democratic Republican Independent Progress), not to mention the Bloomin' ** Fringe. And an earlier thought about this field, Creationist Recreation Applied Properly, no CRAP. Speaking of anachronism, if someone turned water into wine, who turned whine*** into trickle down? Answer? Just a Laffer. No disrespect to the good nature and good deeds of Reagan and Nixon or vice verse us, but they have certainly been proved to be relative.]
** EPA = Expletive Properly Applied.
*** Needlessly(sic)
Underlying this thinking is a reaction to those that think we think we know better, and those that think they are we. I directly refer to the rhetoric of the Right and the fact that they are the minority for a reason, continually evidenced by their behavior as well as the fact that polls change and they had better.* Wow, I think that was anti-sic or at least freely punctuated, but who the Fringe knows or is it the Shadow or Charlie McCarthy(**)ism?
* Bold summary and link(correction: reference) to other asterisk not to mention runonwordplay.
[belated ** talk about prophetic gathering of moss I am not sure I know yet.]
[Well...not exactly, but close enough for Hurts work or Wads-worth.]
Tuesday, March 23, 2010
New Poll on Health Care Bill
49% a good thing
40% a bad thing
And we have yet to run with it,
Thanks to The Ed Show.
[Miscellaneous notes* and thanks:
Chris Dodd
The Fixes
Country First
Reconciliation
Thanks, Keith, Lawrence and Rachel!]
[Yet is this a hitch? If they lose the mandate it could just be a tax.]
* 3-24-10 link added but see run on...
40% a bad thing
And we have yet to run with it,
Thanks to The Ed Show.
[Miscellaneous notes* and thanks:
Chris Dodd
The Fixes
Country First
Reconciliation
Thanks, Keith, Lawrence and Rachel!]
[Yet is this a hitch? If they lose the mandate it could just be a tax.]
* 3-24-10 link added but see run on...
The Truly Historic Moment
Thank You,
MSNBC
And I wish to thank a staffer at the Minority Leader's office for a discussion on the nature of the Republican complaints...(in progress/the process...) I have a message that might be returned regarding a dispute that there were 166 Republican amendments and some rhetoric about what the New York Times came out with yesterday.
Thank you.
Thank you, Very Much
H.R.4872 next up for Senate Reconciliation.[awkwardly phrased, linked and/or sourced]
MSNBC
And I wish to thank a staffer at the Minority Leader's office for a discussion on the nature of the Republican complaints...(in progress/the process...) I have a message that might be returned regarding a dispute that there were 166 Republican amendments and some rhetoric about what the New York Times came out with yesterday.
Thank you.
Thank you, Very Much
H.R.4872 next up for Senate Reconciliation.[awkwardly phrased, linked and/or sourced]
Comparing an Error
And/or Era?
Baby Killer vs. the Great Society
The Texas Republican who shouted "baby killer" apologized as he was not speaking of Representative Stupak, just the bill. While the New York Times corrects Nobel Prize winner Paul Krugman, for saying Newt Gingrich was speaking about President Johnson and the Civil Rights Act, when he was speaking of the Great Society.
Minor corrections in both cases, but both seem to compound the point. As the blanks were needed filling, the former is still is for shame and the latter still for irony of whose Waterloo. On the darker side of irony there was the gauntlett congress bravely faced[*]to do their job, while the previous administration protected their leader from the signs of the times.
Moments before the historic signing moments I hear: Maybe the Republicans peaked too soon?
[Thank You - Keith Olbermann for Making History and Moving Forward ]
Baby Killer vs. the Great Society
The Texas Republican who shouted "baby killer" apologized as he was not speaking of Representative Stupak, just the bill. While the New York Times corrects Nobel Prize winner Paul Krugman, for saying Newt Gingrich was speaking about President Johnson and the Civil Rights Act, when he was speaking of the Great Society.
Minor corrections in both cases, but both seem to compound the point. As the blanks were needed filling, the former is still is for shame and the latter still for irony of whose Waterloo. On the darker side of irony there was the gauntlett congress bravely faced[*]to do their job, while the previous administration protected their leader from the signs of the times.
Moments before the historic signing moments I hear: Maybe the Republicans peaked too soon?
[Thank You - Keith Olbermann for Making History and Moving Forward ]
Sunday, March 21, 2010
Historic Health Care Bill Passed
The House has Passed the Senate Bill.
Thank You Historic Speaker!
Thank You Minority Leader for so disrespecfully recording your nonsense for history.[*]
The Senate now has the option of adding a few Republican options or maybe even some Democratic plans.
*[3-22-10] Believe me, I don't believe I could more respectfully record my reaction to Minority Leader Boehner's address.
[In fact, I actually just had a long discussion with a Deputy Chief of Staff reflecting my displeasure with his antics. I may or may not summarize it later, but I can characterize it as a less than heated discussion. My main point was that it is difficult to imagine many reasonable people bothering to call in to respond to such behavior, given the visceral reaction and condescension possible. It might be likened to calling in on a childish tantrum. I was just curious about the decorum of their callers, I think I kept mine, but I did continually get caught by the whining rhetoric. The reported belief that the process was unprecedented and partisan like never before. Ha! Oh and the "blame it on emotions" mixed in with the "need to be heard" excuse.]
[Update: see runaround rhetoric and clean sheet of paper: the Republican "leadership" has been forced by Democratic leadership to be accountable but still whine about the politics while blaiming it on 200 years of heated words simultaneously martyring** themselves in the rhetoric and hijacking*** the word "change" from a "clean sheet of paper". They want history to be forced or a force, as long as it is thier force not the peoples. Which "common sense" would mean, no history, no constitution, no rhetoric, no politics.
** I hope I have not too incautiously used the word, but it might be better to say Cantor makes a rather heroic leap in his rhetoric and "akin" to self-sacrifice.
*** refers to office call]
Thank You Historic Speaker!
Thank You Minority Leader for so disrespecfully recording your nonsense for history.[*]
The Senate now has the option of adding a few Republican options or maybe even some Democratic plans.
*[3-22-10] Believe me, I don't believe I could more respectfully record my reaction to Minority Leader Boehner's address.
[In fact, I actually just had a long discussion with a Deputy Chief of Staff reflecting my displeasure with his antics. I may or may not summarize it later, but I can characterize it as a less than heated discussion. My main point was that it is difficult to imagine many reasonable people bothering to call in to respond to such behavior, given the visceral reaction and condescension possible. It might be likened to calling in on a childish tantrum. I was just curious about the decorum of their callers, I think I kept mine, but I did continually get caught by the whining rhetoric. The reported belief that the process was unprecedented and partisan like never before. Ha! Oh and the "blame it on emotions" mixed in with the "need to be heard" excuse.]
[Update: see runaround rhetoric and clean sheet of paper: the Republican "leadership" has been forced by Democratic leadership to be accountable but still whine about the politics while blaiming it on 200 years of heated words simultaneously martyring** themselves in the rhetoric and hijacking*** the word "change" from a "clean sheet of paper". They want history to be forced or a force, as long as it is thier force not the peoples. Which "common sense" would mean, no history, no constitution, no rhetoric, no politics.
** I hope I have not too incautiously used the word, but it might be better to say Cantor makes a rather heroic leap in his rhetoric and "akin" to self-sacrifice.
*** refers to office call]
Friday, March 19, 2010
Thursday, March 18, 2010
Revolutionary Hospitals (and Back Again)
Recently a health reform critic(kindly put) claimed that the founding fathers had hospitals and did not mention them in the constitution(awkwardly put), but I cannot adequately paraphrase the rhetoric. But I did wonder at the time if it was accurate. Yesterday NPI, has a different angle on health care reform and technical advances and the baby boom face of more than half of recipients of health care. But an auxiliary question came to mind. When did health care become for profit? But the real question is when did health insurance become for profit? My problem is that there is always a deeper question. Our problem is that too many have the wrong answers*.
Some have such a weak definition of capitalism that it is the nature of economics since the public market. Others don't even realize what the "invisible hand" means? I have not fully read Adam Smith's Wealth of Nations, but at least I know he waved it. But I forgot who recently said, it is called the "Invisible Hand" because it is not there ***. While other's still... [trailing off] I might have been heading to a more substantial answer, but my point is that some people get caught up in the debate between dirty words and the only word. Too many are taking sides, especially when it comes to the word "progressive" by playing on fears and taking change for granted, and passing the buck, but not the money**.
In memoriam.
* and without picking sides I would add: too many feel they have the only answer. At least when it comes to history and what we are based on, with intentions to move forward.
** ironically these last two links have a good point in common(well not exactly): but in regards to the baseline, the blogger admits to some essentials or entitlements if you will, at least outside their argument for the need for profit, while Milton Friedman (a Libertarian) suggests a negative income tax to balance the social responsibility of companies to make profits. And entitlements are the real subject for the operating table, but so might be the flat tax and overall safety net reform. Actually speaking of dirty words, reform is not the word, adjustments are all that are needed to . Not that major adjustments might need to be considered in regard to globalization and world finance and diplomacy, which really scares the one word people, not to mention communities. It is not about the finger in the dike or the egg on the wall or the face of humpty dumpty, it is about the hands on the foundation of civilization.
*** maybe him but not here
Other links, invisible hand, or the pointing finger
[Sorry to not point a finer finger, but it is all about the revolving perspectives and finding balance without starting from scratch.]
P.S. I did not read these but did run across them prior this blog, let alone realize at the time I would be back. They could be the concrete mixer, mortar or cobble stone of my thinking.
Some have such a weak definition of capitalism that it is the nature of economics since the public market. Others don't even realize what the "invisible hand" means? I have not fully read Adam Smith's Wealth of Nations, but at least I know he waved it. But I forgot who recently said, it is called the "Invisible Hand" because it is not there ***. While other's still... [trailing off] I might have been heading to a more substantial answer, but my point is that some people get caught up in the debate between dirty words and the only word. Too many are taking sides, especially when it comes to the word "progressive" by playing on fears and taking change for granted, and passing the buck, but not the money**.
In memoriam.
* and without picking sides I would add: too many feel they have the only answer. At least when it comes to history and what we are based on, with intentions to move forward.
** ironically these last two links have a good point in common(well not exactly): but in regards to the baseline, the blogger admits to some essentials or entitlements if you will, at least outside their argument for the need for profit, while Milton Friedman (a Libertarian) suggests a negative income tax to balance the social responsibility of companies to make profits. And entitlements are the real subject for the operating table, but so might be the flat tax and overall safety net reform. Actually speaking of dirty words, reform is not the word, adjustments are all that are needed to . Not that major adjustments might need to be considered in regard to globalization and world finance and diplomacy, which really scares the one word people, not to mention communities. It is not about the finger in the dike or the egg on the wall or the face of humpty dumpty, it is about the hands on the foundation of civilization.
*** maybe him but not here
Other links, invisible hand, or the pointing finger
[Sorry to not point a finer finger, but it is all about the revolving perspectives and finding balance without starting from scratch.]
P.S. I did not read these but did run across them prior this blog, let alone realize at the time I would be back. They could be the concrete mixer, mortar or cobble stone of my thinking.
Wednesday, March 17, 2010
Demon Pass
or Demonizing Politics with Deem and Pass!
At the 3 minute mark I agree the Democrats might be better off with a vote, but it is overly cynical of politics and ironically political to blame the creative process.
But Senator Stabinow defends or explains the process.
[Is that straight? I hope it is straight now, and I thought that the Klein and O'Donnell had fallen for some political spin, even though their intentions might be right. In fact, it is like the Valentine metaphor, but they just send them in one envelope.]
[Here are the demons who don't understand that self-executing is just what they seem to want, when it really means getting it done, and I don't mean Dennis Kucinich.]
[Belated Chalk Up and Kudos to Kucinich ]
At the 3 minute mark I agree the Democrats might be better off with a vote, but it is overly cynical of politics and ironically political to blame the creative process.
But Senator Stabinow defends or explains the process.
[Is that straight? I hope it is straight now, and I thought that the Klein and O'Donnell had fallen for some political spin, even though their intentions might be right. In fact, it is like the Valentine metaphor, but they just send them in one envelope.]
[Here are the demons who don't understand that self-executing is just what they seem to want, when it really means getting it done, and I don't mean Dennis Kucinich.]
[Belated Chalk Up and Kudos to Kucinich ]
Tuesday, March 16, 2010
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
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
Monday, March 15, 2010
Politics Local and National
Find your local party organization.
DEMOCRATS
Republicans- not so easy
Liberals- at your own risk*
Conservatives
Green Party
Independents (you are on your own)
Libertarian or Ron Paul
Actually this was just a quick search which evolved from "find your(specified)organization" to find your specified "party", and my comments are more about the ease with which they are found.
As a local example: 41st LD Democrats **
Puget Sound Liberals
Northwest Progressive Institute
Progressive Radio
Organizing for America
Democracy for America
King County Democrats
Washington State Democrats
This may seem condescending, but what the Beck!
MoveOn
Think Progress The Final Act for Health Reform
Media Matters
not to mention Democrats.com Save our Democracy!
[BTW: two proposals(rhetorically)
a. If corporations have individual rights, where do they come off as being able to own other individuals?
b. And where does an individual share come in? I mean there is the equal protection clause but an individual gets one vote per share of stock?
c. It seems that congress should tighten up immigration when it comes to such commerce let alone labor.
Actually these could be substantive considerations.]
*if I can't offend my own, who can I offend, well maybe everyone, but I am being ironic with a keen political calculus. Actually my own is "progressive", and we must stop running with(or at or from) words like scissors.
** attendance at District Nominationg Convention and Caucus was surprisingly low, but could be attributed to the forgone conclusion that there would be no opposition to our incumbents, satisfaction with work being done, anticipation of the work to come, and the nature of the top two primary holding some surprises if not a field for competition from the wings of hope and cynicism.
DEMOCRATS
Republicans- not so easy
Liberals- at your own risk*
Conservatives
Green Party
Independents (you are on your own)
Libertarian or Ron Paul
Actually this was just a quick search which evolved from "find your(specified)organization" to find your specified "party", and my comments are more about the ease with which they are found.
As a local example: 41st LD Democrats **
Puget Sound Liberals
Northwest Progressive Institute
Progressive Radio
Organizing for America
Democracy for America
King County Democrats
Washington State Democrats
This may seem condescending, but what the Beck!
MoveOn
Think Progress The Final Act for Health Reform
Media Matters
not to mention Democrats.com Save our Democracy!
[BTW: two proposals(rhetorically)
a. If corporations have individual rights, where do they come off as being able to own other individuals?
b. And where does an individual share come in? I mean there is the equal protection clause but an individual gets one vote per share of stock?
c. It seems that congress should tighten up immigration when it comes to such commerce let alone labor.
Actually these could be substantive considerations.]
*if I can't offend my own, who can I offend, well maybe everyone, but I am being ironic with a keen political calculus. Actually my own is "progressive", and we must stop running with(or at or from) words like scissors.
** attendance at District Nominationg Convention and Caucus was surprisingly low, but could be attributed to the forgone conclusion that there would be no opposition to our incumbents, satisfaction with work being done, anticipation of the work to come, and the nature of the top two primary holding some surprises if not a field for competition from the wings of hope and cynicism.
Thursday, March 11, 2010
MoveOn
It might be the watchword but...
at least a just dot org[See update]
and earlier affiliations:
People for the American Way
American Civil Liberties Union
Democracy dot com.
Democracy for America
Organizing for America
These are just a start.
PLEASE check their messages and to whom it may concern.
I recently said that President Obama has been investing his capital*** rather than spending it like the previous president. Not to mention that capital has something to do with what is working or in some cases not. I mean he has put alot in the pipeline*, and there is much more to do, which involves the nature of politics not just being local, let alone the only blame**. I mean in regards to the nature of our security concerns in relation to the international and corporate complexities of economic and diplomatic processes and our diverse and common interests.
*pipeline in this case might be inappropriate or ironic tweaking of what does not work
** or process
*** not necessarily on this blog
[Update on political complexities: from the Progressive Caucus co-chair on health care, as part of a comprehensive progressive process. On the other hand? And on the complex hand of recovering capital.]
at least a just dot org[See update]
and earlier affiliations:
People for the American Way
American Civil Liberties Union
Democracy dot com.
Democracy for America
Organizing for America
These are just a start.
PLEASE check their messages and to whom it may concern.
I recently said that President Obama has been investing his capital*** rather than spending it like the previous president. Not to mention that capital has something to do with what is working or in some cases not. I mean he has put alot in the pipeline*, and there is much more to do, which involves the nature of politics not just being local, let alone the only blame**. I mean in regards to the nature of our security concerns in relation to the international and corporate complexities of economic and diplomatic processes and our diverse and common interests.
*pipeline in this case might be inappropriate or ironic tweaking of what does not work
** or process
*** not necessarily on this blog
[Update on political complexities: from the Progressive Caucus co-chair on health care, as part of a comprehensive progressive process. On the other hand? And on the complex hand of recovering capital.]
Wednesday, March 10, 2010
Message to the House.
There has been a March On Washington for the Public Option.
Here is the message to the House from Ed Schultz.
Thank you Senator Cantwell
Thank you Senator Murray
for supporting the Public Option if not signing the letter.
Here is the message to the House from Ed Schultz.
Thank you Senator Cantwell
Thank you Senator Murray
for supporting the Public Option if not signing the letter.
Monday, March 08, 2010
On the road again.
Health Care Reform Now.
[Comprehensive Letter]
[See Irony * ]
[Targeted side ways.]
* and "made progress" -> here
[Comprehensive Letter]
[See Irony * ]
[Targeted side ways.]
* and "made progress" -> here
Thursday, March 04, 2010
A new day is dawning.
I wish to be circumspect on the Obama plan.
So I will can the hope and hype and just link or google.
No offense google, but what the...?
Well here or here.
[update:Really!Text and video , reconciliation, the new Obama? what to run on.]
So I will can the hope and hype and just link or google.
No offense google, but what the...?
Well here or here.
[update:Really!Text and video , reconciliation, the new Obama? what to run on.]
Wednesday, March 03, 2010
Snooki?
With the comments of Republicans recently, like Senator Jim DeMint, and Senator Jim Bunning, it was tempting just to call their offices to ask if they are getting many expletive deleted calls. That is a serious inquiry, because I wonder just how many sensible people would even think their call mattered, considering their behavior * which is frequently rude and more commonly childish, and forget having any relationship to facts. Really, it might make more sense to quote Peewee Herman. "I know you are but what am I.(...)Infinity." Especially with the employment of Snooki. Peewee may be on the road to reform, but at least he knows he is childish. "Kids, these days." Speaking of cultural cracks: "Mr. Wilson!"(R)
*in the halls of Congress? Not to mention other whining.(SEE BTW)
BTW: Glenn Beck is a PC figure, standing for Pop Culture as in destroy civilization.
Oh and I have employed a new label, except it would too frequently be applied as it is the Republican Agenda.
(R) a ribble on a recent app
[On the other hand(American Exceptionalism) and foot in mouth, I can't remember who said... what?... but in regards to the fall of the Soviet Union, either before or after, in the thinking of Reagan or the latest Bush, just because a president will not put his actions into words, does not mean they cannot be justified, nor not be changed.]
*in the halls of Congress? Not to mention other whining.(SEE BTW)
BTW: Glenn Beck is a PC figure, standing for Pop Culture as in destroy civilization.
Oh and I have employed a new label, except it would too frequently be applied as it is the Republican Agenda.
(R) a ribble on a recent app
[On the other hand(American Exceptionalism) and foot in mouth, I can't remember who said... what?... but in regards to the fall of the Soviet Union, either before or after, in the thinking of Reagan or the latest Bush, just because a president will not put his actions into words, does not mean they cannot be justified, nor not be changed.]
Tuesday, March 02, 2010
Comprehensive Letter
President Obama has presented his plan.
Find letter here.
He has taken some more Republican proposals from the bi-partisan health care summit, confirming he is the Fair and Balanced Centrist of the previous post.
Now, I am not decrying his lack of liberal leanings, only contrasting them with the Right, with hopes the left and Democrats get the job done. If there is only one letter between hope and hype, we should know the Y.
Find letter here.
He has taken some more Republican proposals from the bi-partisan health care summit, confirming he is the Fair and Balanced Centrist of the previous post.
Now, I am not decrying his lack of liberal leanings, only contrasting them with the Right, with hopes the left and Democrats get the job done. If there is only one letter between hope and hype, we should know the Y.
Monday, March 01, 2010
Fair and Balanced and Centrist?
Whether you are a trickle-down Tea Partier or a Bubble-Up Egghead, not to mention the victims of ad hominem, ad group'em, ad label'em, add lose'em rhetoric or its perpetrator, The New Yorker might be part of the problem. But maybe it's my problem* or maybe they have made progress ***.
Speaking of bull or the Rodeo Clown, we should ponder who is the bull and who is the cowboy in that self- prescription. Not to mention Irony.
* I'm actually a great admirer but thought it might be too out there **for others
** link is post hock (or add: pre-pawn)
***BOTTOM LINE: If you can get past Newt Gingrich and his "post-modern" interpetations of his "democratic socialist" buddies Camus and Orwell, it is a fair and balanced whack at a "comprehensive" problem, and I think the Hopi-ChangeY thing has a... quiver.
{embedded words: made progress(read link),bull(USATodayWeekend), Rodeo Clown(David Sirota), self (Bill Bennett), prescription(Dr. Dean), Irony(Robert Reich), too out there(Beck),comprehensive(Lamar Alexander), problem(cheap shot), quiver} (->)(see comment & ribble)
i.e. sometimes a scroll over of the embedded words(links) in this post will merit a full read or hint that will assist in context.(<-)
Speaking of bull or the Rodeo Clown, we should ponder who is the bull and who is the cowboy in that self- prescription. Not to mention Irony.
* I'm actually a great admirer but thought it might be too out there **for others
** link is post hock (or add: pre-pawn)
***BOTTOM LINE: If you can get past Newt Gingrich and his "post-modern" interpetations of his "democratic socialist" buddies Camus and Orwell, it is a fair and balanced whack at a "comprehensive" problem, and I think the Hopi-ChangeY thing has a... quiver.
{embedded words: made progress(read link),bull(USATodayWeekend), Rodeo Clown(David Sirota), self (Bill Bennett), prescription(Dr. Dean), Irony(Robert Reich), too out there(Beck),comprehensive(Lamar Alexander), problem(cheap shot), quiver} (->)(see comment & ribble)
i.e. sometimes a scroll over of the embedded words(links) in this post will merit a full read or hint that will assist in context.(<-)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)