Benoit Mandelbrot

May he RIP! Here's to nature. What about sythesis of competition and cooperation? Do we now have the 4 C's?

In plain FOX

Ctrl F "Dino Rossi"
(in the latter link)But it really seems that Dino Rossi is a radical in moderates clothing, not really courting the tea party, but certainly following in step, to woo the big money low* information[vote].
*not really low, but not always comprehensive or comprehensible.

Return of the Fed

update[But for Bush? Separation of words and meaning. Harry Reid did not say "but for me" but the Fed did say but for you.
{re:sabbatical timeline in question for this post}

[[But for Bush Inserted 10-31-10]
[Happy Halloween!]
[Mid-sentence construction of a comment which I will not now paraphrase, as I never finished the sentence, the term "hortatorical* injunctive" came to mind, and a quick search found this. My point is that it is just as valid to say that Reid said "but for me" as it is to say that "separation of church and state" are truly not in the constitution.]

*11-2-11 spelling corrected to "hortatorical" "but for" missing c. Meanwhile there is an important hortatorical point embedded in "this" that follows. [Weaver of hortatorical injunctive and subjunctive. The cause and effect of government, let alone the media.]

Separation of

Church and State is not in the constitution... technically or more accurately, verbatim, it is not. I really thought that Christine O'Donnell was smarter than this. Oops I guess I am too, that was her point. The video does not do justice to the article. Not that that was its job. Bottom line, the real issue is a confounding of science and religion. One is a method or process, the other a structure and sometimes authority. But I think a better verbatim is...
"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America" If I may be so bold.
(And then there are other* issues.]
*How no means yes (Ctrl F link)and the relationship of science to authority(or is it soveriegnty?): an imbedded yet incomplete theory.)

Nature is an Oxymoron

By Definition a Paradox.
When a noun, it is usually a mother...
But ask for a third opinion.
[Pairo'docs]

Oh Sasha!

Norman Goldman fielded a call[**] from a very enthused non-voter. Change has not come fast enough for her. It is reminiscent of my tent link.
[Re: big tent, small tent or mess tent, there is a mixed message and metaphor. A tent requires a few poles, and it is hard to believe that Sasha was a big "D" Democrat, but I hope she was there at the precinct and district level having her voice heard and supporting like minds if she found them. Then she might also understand the small "d" of democracy. If not, she might not begin to understand[*] but can certainly make a lemon from the lemonade.]
[Other.]
Nonetheless:
[*] 10-20-10 The American Prospect (Special Report)
["There's a sucker born every minute." That does not make them billionaires, but it might make for billionaires. Re: Peter G. Peterson "Ctrl F" i.e. some are nurtured
[** 10-20-10 just inserted there is also Erin at about 27 minutes, Sasha at 34:44 Also see Norm at 34min. "Dems do not act like Repubs, militarist, top-down and unquestioning." VOTE! Because those on both sides will keep the Phoenix theory from working. My way or the highway, unfortunately is only the low way.] Also see Bill 53min on past 53:33 to 56:45.

au contraire

Pardon my Cheney...(name calling and deleteds aside) it is not the "loonies" but the dis-enthused and profits of train wrecks* who may cost the Democrats.
[Post post con tent, i.e just in from my Inbox]
BTW: Cheney does not deserve a pardon, but my French does not need one.
* Barbara Walter's term for what sells or gets covered

Debt and Tax Cuts,

debt and tax cuts,
go together like love and cha-nge...
you can't have one without the - other.
Well...not exactly but close enough for government work. BTW, what the heck does running a business have to do with running a government? Well one important feature is investment. While profit is not really the purpose of government, let alone the main point of any needs related services, let alone infrastructure, health care, education, insurance and banking.

Investment seems a basic feature that even those in business don't understand when it comes to their own tax situation. And when it comes to taxes cuts it is a no brainer that they increase debt. It is a fallacy that cutting taxes increase revenues. That only works on one side of the Laffer Curve not the other. i.e. it is a bell curve.

And apparently no means yes in some cirles, while apparently the tea party does not understand "taxation without representation". A prohibition of legislative change to an initiative means that what is not in the initiative can be in the future. But not without the legislature paying a price they do not want to pay now. In other words the only way to prevent the possibility of change is to takeaway the possibility of representation and politics to have an effect. When it comes to what is not in the ads or not on the table, it is as ridiculous(if not more so) to claim that supporters of I-1098 are not telling you it is an income tax, (5% over $200K for single/$400K for couples or 1% of the tax filers) as it is that the same ads don't mention a 20% reduction in state property taxes and an over 1000%* increase in the B&O TAX CREDIT which will bring the benefit to 80% of businesses.
* actually this is my calculation of $420 being raised to $4800

Independent comment

Senatory Patty Murray and former state legilsatore Dino Rossi have held two debates of which I have heard more comment on than snippets. I could relate to the charge that the questions may have not been answered directly even though I fancy that I may have undestood one more than the other and if you think it is simple then that is the side that might be wrong. This is the perpsective I take from what has been exchanged in the ad campaigns. So if you haven't seen the debates keep that in mind, not that I am independent. My point is that there is a need to counter the so-called facts that come out as well as answer questions, while some of the answers are just plain incomplete. My reference to independent comment above refers to close to neutrality here but sympathy with one frustrated with the party representatives(or rather only a choice between the two), who incidentally was a libertarian with socialist understanding. I won't parse that but at least the individual had great scepticism for the so-called tea partiers, even though I find a libertarian socialist to be even more idealist if not a fantasy. On the other hand, while some want their cake and eat it too, there seems some extremity of balance(if not irony) in this combination.
[Cross Reference to be inserted but it has to do with fuzzy math and fuzzy language.]
[For those who think that they have to know better to vote, vote anyway*, at least there is a shot at cancelling a vote of someone that does not know better enough not to vote.]
* in some races the first link was neutral or gave dual endorsements, rely on this one and then the other to fill in if any questions.
[If the choice is between a Democrat or a Republican and that is usually it**, vote the Democrat as they can be counted on to be more flexible than the Republican. The time to influence them by sending a message was in the primary.]
** technically it is not the rule but the result that it still happens that way even though concievably the top-two could be of the same party, the political calculus or lemonade making does not work out that way, and third parties are even more in a pickle(I mean lemon.)

Revolt of the Zombies

On Demand.(currently on Comcast)
"When right ways disappear, one's person must vanish with one's principles."
From the movie,(also Mencius) not to be taken out of context or from the prespective of Confusionism. (...or)

Obama v. Foreign Legions

Chamber of Commerce enables foreign investments or...

Game On!

[POSTED 10-22-10 10:37 AM]
Good Cop, Bad Cop Over:

If the Democrats manage to hold on, for the first time in a long time they would have an incentive to fight back against a system that is rigged in favor of the rich and the powerful. Because those same folks just declared war on them. If they don't join the battle soon, they are going to get wiped out in 2012. If you thought business interests spent a lot of money in this election, wait till you get a load of 2012.

To be clear, of course not all business interests are nefarious. They are a very legitimate constituency to consider when making policy. But when corporations use their power to kill a bill that would have stopped subsidies for offshoring jobs, then that is exactly the kind of abuse of power that is hurting this country. And that just happened last month.(Cenk Uygur)

It should be apparent that if so much money is going against the Democrats and for the Republicans, then there is a major difference between the two, and voters may know that more than the money and polls will tell.

U.S. Chamber of Commerce

The papers apparently are green.
Undocumented foriegn contributions for political attack ads.
[Belated related and Foxed.]
[Update Post Inserted 10-22-10]

Generalization Warfare

[Posted 10-27-10]
and Characterizationalism.
Unmarketed forces.
What's Christopher Hedges' problem in this problematic read?
Class warfare? Liberal is not a class nor the answer.
VALUES ARE THE ANSWER and politics the process. Liberal as "object of public scorn"? Yes! But a word does not make an object, nor a class. Nor do they adequately describe the institutions of the church, press, academia or party.
Now... "low", "middle" and "upper class", may be a more proper use of terms, especially when it comes to labor, incomes or wealth and it is no more fair to blame the class as a whole. But it would seem that the middle-class bears the brunt of any blame if that is the game. Where were they when the so-called liberal class failed them? Satisfied with their progress and taking the liberals for granted, as well as the powers they thought they wielded. But warfare is not the right field of political correction.
[It may have been just over my head, but it seems a cheap shot at Chomsky.]

Interview with

Noam Chomsky: 'er Speigel[Correction]
My first or maybe second impression is that Noam Chomsky is the anti-thesis of Pat Buchanan. At least in respect to the idea that maybe only I had that when Pat Buchanan says something** that both sides of the political spectrum agree with he might have something. In Chomsky's case it might be where both sides have a bone to pick with Chomsky he may be just right. At least in the respect that he lacks from the two quarters not in fractions but perspective. He is either a tool of the forces that be or their nemesis, but he is not Goldilocks*, any more than Taleb.

*self-correcting or twisting a metaphor, I did not mean to bring in the tea party or mama bears
** at present I don't want to dredge up what one might be as I could be wrong

[American Prospect unrelated?]
As of posting, I have not fully read the Chomsky piece on The New World Order(see correction), but did finish the American Prospect piece, Old Image, New Portrait in paper form, and found the other links for later or earlier(in respect to Keynes and Taleb not bull-lies).]
[Unintended Bully link. Please note that Wednesday's Bully post preceded Thursday's Last Word here, but the Chomsky piece above was much earlier.(when corrected a little less so, maybe accounted for by jet lag)]
[Not really an update but a link 10-27-10]

The Bully...

Poor Pit. Not to pull my R's upon my return from Japan, it does seem odd though, for billionaires(and corporations) for free speech not wanting their names known for fear of bullying. The pity is in the pendulum of victim hoods. Not to mention[*] the other slap shot at robustness.

[*]10-14-10 My sarcasm might be too subtle here, in that the Poor link(above) on Taleb's Robustness may be a slightly slanted perspective of economics from the business perspective. The Business Insider might be no more than a blog or astro bagger in terms of its criticism or incomprehesion of Taleb's theories. Taleb online The New Yorker under my usual meanderings. I would also suggest whether Bernanke has read Taleb or not, he should explain that there has not been a replacement for Keynesian economics, and that the government has a role to play or the balance will continue to teeter for the moneyed rather than the purposeful. On the other hand this may just be an incompresible way of saying that unless Taleb is understood and improved upon, we can suffice with continued tinkering as long as it is with purpose and for the people. Unfortunately this may be a bigger task than understanding Taleb. What I allude or have links here to, are the international and comprehensive nature of economics evolution. And simply put, the economy must not fall off the wall, but work on the wall must be comprehensive if not wholistic. If I may reiterate my tetrahedron of physics, psychology, philosophy and politics ofor purpose. The pinnacle of the project is the purpose of the structure and the process that works whatever is intended** to work.

** And I have not intentionally left "we" out of this, but it puts politics, religion and economics as part of the process not the purpose, or the be all and end all, intended or not.
[At the risk of further incomprehensiveness, I suggest that the administration is doing what it can short of a complete replacement of Keynesian economics, otherwise know as my Egg/Wall metaphor, while Taleb's approach may be just the thing as a goal. There are natural laws, and they must be worked with or they will be against us all. See tetrahedron not theology.]

Buck up...

the slippery slope!
[and riding the wave of nuance and law]

Red(Turn)coat Express

Or Turn(Red)Coat gathers no moss.

On Sabbatical.

Marching in Spirit!
[One Nation]

Obama v. The Economy Stupid

[Follow-up Posted 10-29-10]
Fair and Balanced.
[The Daily Show, President Obama, Austan Goolsbee]
[Are we the people we have waited for or still fearing?]

Buck Up!

The 2010 campaign has just begun. It is very apporpriate that the politics has just become fired up. After all, Democrats have been busy doing their jobs*, and there are so many checks and balances from the big tent diversity of the likes of the Blue Dogs or as some would say corporatists or others say capitalists, (the right are just prostitutes(some used a different word) for the trickle-down. [Pardon the in-your-end Oh! NOT!]
* see word link and campaign link
[speaking of Taxin' Questions and graduated billionaires and less of a persons(10m 26sec).]

Philosophical Spin

And the Prospects* for Metaphor?
I am a bit ahead of the curve here, but regarding the discovery of a new planet that does not spin, and therefor has a hot side and a cold side, i.e. a black and white world. But I wish to note the third party implications and the double Goldilocks effect. It is not only where the planet is located but where on the planet life could originate, without the effects of change[**] that is global.
*Originally intended link not available yet.
[**]after all could life really happen in a no spin zone?

Running Joke

Guilt by association, innocent my label.
Well rather*, she runs...innocent by no association with reality.

Upon first hearing of the Christine O'Donnell victory, my first reaction was hmmm, a new and improved Sarah Palin. But in all actuality, for an English major? She is rather loose with her labels. She attended Phoenix Institute which rented space at an Oxford campus, and she attended Claremont Instute which she labeled "Claremont Graduate University". And apparently her English major might be actually English Literature, but she may have made up for any deficiencies. Her employment record seems to be heavily reliant on her academic studies[**], not that she has recorded much income or communicated clearly. But if it was not her who communicated these errors, just who was paid to commit them? My point is...that problem is solved.
[Bottom line: She studied Constitutional Government under a graduate fellowship at a conservative think tank. QED: by degree in lipstick.]

* original paraphrase: Some run with "Guilt by association, but are guilty of (& innocent by) no association with reality". (But I often evolve mid-sentence, or mid-their revolution.)
[**] Zoominfo updated link.

Or ask for a third

opinion.
Buck Up!
Why aren't we still evolving? Because why would monkeys become human when some are making monkeys out of humans? And others are nostalgic for cavemen if not devolving. And a satirist expecting gravitas?
[link references in order:
Josh Marshall-Joan Walsh(TPM/Salon)Buck Up.,
Eugene Robinson-Chalse Mahtesian(WaPo/Politico)Dem Ads.,
Chris & P.J. O'Rourke-Satire Evolving?,
J.C. Watts-Brendan Steinhouser(Former Rep. Rep./Freedom Works)Republican-Tea Party.,
Chris Mathews-Drive the Freakin' Car!,
Satirist-Get out the Freakin' Vote!]

Here's the WOW!

Bane(or) Change.
First we finally have the Republican plan,
then it is surprisingly still too early.
But the lack of wow may be the plan.*

Navigation instructions:
[Expand Comments] @Alice and wow
as well as hit "Ctrl F"
for inserts, and "insurgency".

*I don't know if I am really saying anything here, but the word oxymoron comes to mind, yet sometimes even they are justified (oximorons, that is) as reality is a paradox, and we are fighting over just what is certifiable. And some are just fighting to change the subject. By George I think I nailed it. Who knows better than a pair o'docs? Ask for another subject or more patients.

[Update: Early'r Word! Buck up! Isn't that Trickle-Down Economics gave us? Bottoms Up!
[And in Contrast? Yet to be inserted.(Scratch Read)]

Lemon or Orange?

Or Green*? Why vote?
Ralph Nader asks: Why say yes to the party of no? The answer is, one shouldn't.

*"At the risk of being obvious..." began my letter to the editor, but I guess I went underboard.

Horsey's cartoon goes overboard on voters
At the risk of being obvious, I would like to comment on David Horsey's "Red & Blue America" (May 19). For the sake of humor, it went overboard in its characterizations of those who voted for George W. Bush or Al Gore. I hope it is a good thing if people realize, like I did, how we can see one side funnier or less overboard than the other.
I hope the humor can be less dividing than the colors pinned on Gore and Bush. It also made me realize that there may be value in using more colors, but somehow without Green or any other color being a factor in making us see red.**
[Please note the bold "Green or any other" was struck by the editor, apparently not obvious enough that Nader was the Green party, (and green)the almighty buck and envy. And these days if you need a Tea Party pallet, just smear the colors and brown with hints of purple works nicely.]

** if you want more anger and debt don't vote
[Speaking of info wars]

The Nightmare Act

I didn't plan this.

The Challenge to America...and any independents or disappointed moderates or liberals who are considering sending a message* that will result in Republicans or Tea-Party candidates replacing a Democrat, because that is what will happen if you don't vote, and don't read the Pledge to America and ask, what's new. (Fwhew, deep breath)-
Really now, I don't want to read it all by my lonesome, but I will give everyone a head start. And when you are reading it, ask what is new, has it worked in the past, is it not at least part of the current solution, and do we really need more in that direction or another. This questioning of the dynamics is hard work. Keeping in mind that tax cuts raise debt unless cuts match them. Spending cuts, cut services and risk jobs and infrastructure. Keep in mind that in more successful times in our history we had higher taxes and paid for wars, while cutting taxes and not paying for them have increased the debt and lost jobs. Then there is the war on terror and global concerns such as they are... Is the Pledge to American really new, or are they just wanting their hands back on the steering wheel to turn us back over the bridges they burned? You read, you decide.

[Related comments, reviews and concerns or other sources]

The Dream Act

Colin Powell(on Meet the Press)
A Bloomberg/Powell Faux Party/Rally*/Debate.
*given

Hard to Believe

... Stephen Colbert will testify before congress "in character". But then politicians are always in character, whether they have any or not.** At first my doubt was cast on the source of the claim, but given the nature of events and recent dialogues, it just might work.[*]

[Speaking of working and character, not just being "in character"...this is the other hand. See update.]

[*] just to be clear for the "romantic"*** class(read idealist/radicals): I am saying that for some the Colbert character may get a message across, but for America it is results for which President Obama is working. The "Hard to believe"'s aside.
[**] lame yet balanced segue/pun
[***] or Pawns-or-Kings who think they know better/in disguise(mostly on the Right)

Obama Economy Town Hall

Defending His Record on Economy, Jobs(CNBC)*
Republicans Cry Class Warfare...(The Progressive)
&...Balk @ Obama(...)Proposals they Backed(Bloomberg)

*(see update)Business leader's perspective favors Obama (video approx. 28:00 to 35:30)
[Duoh, stubbed my TOW, (37:00 in) 38:50 infra-structure %GDP]
[Re: social security - it might be only a technical difference but Social Security is a separate issue in the debt picture. While some elements of the discussion/solutions are similar, it may be difficult to discuss simultaneously.]
[Re: Tea Party 40:00 to 44:22 or so, then constitution & commerce clause]
*UPDATE 9-23-10 Top link is good compendium for Obama Town Hall Video as is original asterisk

Back Log

The New McCain[Just posted]
Today Update

Classification Warfare

i.e. Tax on Oh me?
A Tea Party Taxonomy. (Newsweek)
(Speaking of classifications, I have been lax on mine.)
[Found within the above article: The Myth of Objectivity
& The New New Newt and found elsewhere (MSNBC) and related leap(political calculus)]

[Further analysis/commentary: guidelines , Christine O'Donnell, cloning].
[Bottom line: Tea Party Express and Freedom Works are both Republican productions.]

[On the other hand...on pragmatic and incremental* ...]
Poor Segue: Bolds fully read con descending into the NFR.
[Team of Rivals: More Machinations.]
* original redundant link replaced with two possibilites(apologies for dupes)

Belated Link(s)

We Got Ed
caller (Mel?): "Tea Partiers are people scared to call themselves Republicans."
Between One Nation and The Plan we have the American Dream.
Something about diluted by the play of running things. I think it is a Rovian principle that negative[*] gets attention, and if you don't have power, the more negative you go, because you have to run from your plans, which is not exactly all-in-ski(see Comment). I can't remember where I first hint and-correction-(at*) this theory, but if they are running against government, it would make sense that they would run from their own, but then join them.
[*] 9-20-10 speaking of negative attention principle; "at" inserted @ different theory

The New Third Way?

The New McCain[held in draft]
[Just Posted 9-10-20 ]
In Con Text: Under Construction, getting links done.

The Anti-Cheney

Thanks to Thom Hartmann and Ellen Ratner for giving me this lede for my earlier mention.
But seriously, the appointment of Elizabeth Warren to her new position is similar to Cheney being selected to select the vice-president for George Bush. Whether she could be confirmed or even wants the job, this may be a better placement, effectively and politically. This is heavily linked and only lightly read*, but I think that she will have the power to coordinate the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.
*even bold
[If you can't stand the pressure.

Under the Radar

Tangent-Ribble-Insert*
Updates [Under-Construction]**
*(fighting back)in regards to media slant and projections
**Off the Charts Aye of Newt/Stay the Comity
[Just in, NOT* to mention]
* see comments and Roving
[Buried Lede]
[Adjacent comment: The Bailout was Bush's, and all spending/borrowing is not stimulus, some is to recover from deregulation and others to recover the infrasture not invested in, both of which fit into a jobs picture and making up for Reaganomics.]
[Big government is not the problem. Big corporations are not the problem. Special interests are not the problem. Balance with purpose is the project.]

Stay the Comity

Of Course :
Click Here
Don't Click Here[**]
Foot[*] Note: Faux News
[*]GO HERE
[More Course Work.]
[**]just burying the lead (but really see [*])
[Or is it WMD, weapon of mis-direction.]

Aye of Newt

The Interpretation of Dreams*
Pre and post Freud.(Nietszche/Jung)***
Projection of terms/Slash/Tools.
The difference between ends and means seems lost.

Speaking of lost, find Armey's only regret is "calling for" government shutdown before doing it.(My original source was MSNBC, but haven't located it.)
Well? Close enough and speaking of intent...not exactly.**
But is that Alinsky, or both ends against the middle or "authentically dishonest"?

Footnote: This was originally intended to hold some comments for later research, but worked out in the end, excessive links aside.
Label: Post-Nietzschean-Manichean-Platonics.
[Original footnote:(LABEL aside)I was not aware of earlier uses of Aye of Newt.]
* [the two links inserted later]
** [exactly(Forbes/D'Sousa)]
***[4 links added]
QED?
[progressive/pragmatic verses purity/pragmatic = incremental no slippery slope]
[See Comment.]
[One Nation & The Plan]

Off The Charts?

[also Updates under construction after Stockmann below]

Update see [**] there.

[Image 2]

See tax policy here.

[Image 3]

In Con Text:
'Nuf Said?*

*nfry
[Ribble added.]*?
Stockmann

Updates

[under construction]
Not Fully Read Yet
[Slipping this behind previous post.]
Inter-related updates to be added.
Belated Breaking News (Blair/Rose/Gingrich)
Bane(or) Change(D'Souza Chant)
Three Clauses for (Freud)
Let Me Finish (Hardball Panel)
I'm not even (image one)
Still haven't (B partied)
Updates(this post)(see Stockman)
Off the Charts[9-17-10: Tangent-Ribble-Insert/Stay the Comity/Under the Radar]
[footnote: see first link above @31m 40s] top5%earners=top40%spending but we are talking only top 1%, nobody @NBC corrected the CNBC reporter, despite making good points. ("curious about studies" "moody's" and stocks.)]

Tangent-Ribble-Insert

Friday, September 17th, 2010 (8:52 AM)
(under construction)
Really see under 31:30 in see footnote comments: top5%earners=top40%spending but we are talking only top 1%, nobody @NBC corrected the CNBC reporter, despite making good points. ("curious about studies" "moody's" and stocks. thinking on wrong data fighting back tangent back and forth (more jobs)

Still haven't

read all links in the last post, but I will extend the remarks :

There is no policy that President Obama has passed or proposed that added as much to the deficit as the Republican Party's $3.9 trillion extension of the Bush tax cuts. In fact, if you put aside Obama's plan to extend most, but not all, of the Bush tax cuts, there is no policy he has passed or proposed that would do half as much damage to the deficit. There is not even a policy that would do a quarter as much damage to the deficit.

Ezra Klein goes on to say:

The stimulus bill, at $787 billion, would do about a fifth as much damage. But that's actually misleading: The stimulus bill was a temporary expense (not to mention a response to an unexpected emergency). Once it's done, it's done.

But I don't think that the actual "stimulus effect" of the stimulus package or the tax policy can be included in these numbers. i.e. if any tax cuts provide stimulus or raising them would damage the economy

[Let alone]
[BTW: Happy Anniversary to both of us. Political Punch's 5th, my 8th Technically I have not relied much if any, on Political Punch]

I'm not even

gonna read this yet, or MoveOn to this. But is this the deal?
[Scroll over links for 'nuf context]
It seems a spectrum of progress and contrast. From Bush, to Blair, from Tea Parties, to Newt. Each looks better in perspective to the others.
[9-15-10 Re: further preemption]
[Counter Balance[*] of Table]
[Just noting the complexities of international diplomacy and domestic politics, as well as the "two party" system. While we near a deal of major import, minor fears drive local divisions, and have major costs. Democrats run divided, while Republicans divide to run. While this is not a clear and fair analogy, as of course division is needed in races within parties. But Democrats have not created a party to run against itself, while it has those in office who run rather* independent.]
[And Under the Radar]
* see Balance above and cost of debt and war

[Image use and source; original.]

[*][On the other hand, extending only the middle-class Bush tax-cuts only reduces the borrowing by $700 billion.]
[9-16-10: extending the Bush Tax cuts: adds $3.9 trillion** to National Debt, while extending only those above $250K would add only $3.22 trillion. i.e. reduce by $680 billion. ]
** 3.8? Quote: Extending them for the next 10 years would add about $3.8 trillion to a growing national debt that is already the largest since World War II. About $700 billion of that reflects the projected costs of tax cuts for those in the top 2 percent of income-earners.

Let me finish?

Well let's play Hardball.
Which reminds me of a family dialogue,
who started it?

Speaking of projection,
not to mention academic
or turning a page.
Subtitle: Convicting with others' convictions.
Or Aye of Newt, understanding with others' misunderstanding.
[Links: Hardball/dialogue - Chris Matthews, projection/or Aye - Keith Olbermann, to mention - Rachel Maddow.]

Three Clauses for

Freud!

“What if [Obama] is so outside our comprehension, that only if you understand Kenyan, anti-colonial behavior, can you begin to piece together [his actions]?" Gingrich asks. "That is the most accurate, predictive model for his behavior."

"This is a person who is fundamentally out of touch with how the world works, who happened to have played a wonderful con, as a result of which he is now president," Gingrich tells us.

"I think he worked very hard at being a person who is normal, reasonable, moderate, bipartisan, transparent, accommodating -- none of which was true," Gingrich continues. "In the Alinksy tradition, he was being the person he needed to be in order to achieve the position he needed to achieve . . . He was authentically dishonest."

Aye of Newt!
[bold irony]

Bane(Or) Change

[11-17-11 Update Labels]
I guess my chant was heard. But it is not substantial.

There are still three ways of looking at it.
Boehner Change(noun) = debt up, government down
Boehner Change(verb) = nuanced no
Bane or Change(choice) = Reverse or Drive
Might he be bending to the mighty Dem mo'.

Then there is the False flag of divisiveness or moderation?
A pre-curse-or-Y look at narrative? Gingrich supports colonialism**, and in conjunction with Blair, confirms the narrative, the U.S. is more than* patronizing or condescending to the world. I prefer the practical, incremental and political nuances. I feel that there is a major difference in the diplomacy and strategy in the Middle East, compared to the Bush Rumsfeld Cheney unified blame 1% solution.

*[bold irony] It is difficult to balance our national security with national politics in the aim of international justice, let alone diplomacy. Congress in the name of the people must play an important part in the checks and balances as well as the separation of powers. It is a lot easier to say make it so, or make it no, than to make progress. [Segue in time.]

** emphasis "precursory" yet that is the Blair which
projection in the academic twilight*** zone.
*** Gingrich and D'Souza are scary academics
[Speaking of academic lore and narrative not to mention bait and switch.]

Belated Breaking News!

Tony Blair on Charlie Rose*.
I had caught a portion of this yesterday and was rather impressed until he defended his actions in Iraq. His analysis of Iran is disturbing giving his misinformation on events. As special envoy to the Quartet on the Middle East, I wonder about his effectiveness, let alone his intent.**
*complete interview(Iran gaff 24:45 approximately)
** Blair speaks of a narrative
[see 9-13-10 academics and lore ]

Indivisible

with liberty and justice for all!
[President Bush on resolve.]

St. Paul's Grounds Perspectives

St. Paul's Chapel Grounds

Noting in Silence

-
But, never forget!
POSTED 9-10-10
Ground Zero image from 8-29-10 from St. Paul's Chapel grounds.
Portions Written On 9-11-01:

Dear President Bush: (9-15-01)

I chose the following words to express my thoughts sometime before noon PST
September 11, 2001.[Tragedy brings us together but it is also a time to contemplate before action.]

AMERICA UNDER ATTACK. BUT DEMOCRACY MUST BE PROTECTED.

The tragedy that has come to this nation on Sept. 11th, 2001 is nearly
unspeakable. It is an attack on our country but not on our democracy. While
the tone of previous pieces may seem flippant, it would be a form of attack
on our democracy to feel the hesitancy to criticize our government. To find
and prosecute the people who are responsible would be justice. But if
retaliation is justified in the name of a war on terrorism then we must wake
up. War is already ongoing (freedom and lives are lost daily around the
world) and we must be wary of visiting the same atrocities on others. Since
collateral damage has been justified in war (wrongly or not), retaliation
that includes hasty justice may be guilty of, if not also justifying the
same terrible deeds.

[9-13-01 REFLECTING ON A CHOICE OF WORDS]

I have read and re-read my words and have read or heard those of others and
have come to find the importance in having a perspective on the choice of
words. A response to this horrific act is of course needed, but
encouragement comes from the first steps taken to get the support of others
in the world. To act alone would cause consequences that would prolong this
process. There is hope for us if this unity that results truly allows good
to prevail. But voices must not hesitate to point out where goodness is
needed in the world and it must begin at home. Expressing our feeling of
sadness and fear at these outrageous acts must be encouraged and not
translated into anger toward any groups in this or other countries that are
not the perpetrators or actual supporters of terrorism or we will feed the
spiral of hate.

A Reflection On 9/11

9/11: The Rest Should be Silent
I can't quite take meaning from this heading,(Read Above)
but the body is valuable comment.


Note my reflection as I visit one block from Ground Zero(8-29-10)
Take no meaning in relation to recent controversy.
But... in relation to our history.
[Post Scripts A, B & C]

Truman Labor Day 1948

I don't know Jack,
but a caller to Ed,
led me to this search.
I am not sure this is the exact audio, or there is some anachronism here.
But I believe that it was 1948 he mentioned, the difference is that 1949 was into his second term.
[Belated post 9-10]

Belated...(HAPPY BIRTHDAY RMS!)

Congratulation on making it to your terrible two's.[updated link] I feel like a "birther" in having pushed your name and Ed's for MSNBC to match Faux News, although you match Comity* Central as well. In fact I almost admonished you for your "crossing the line", but I on second review of the rhetoric, it was not.** Here is to Bane or Change? You walk the line.
*SIC (spelling in Con/text)

** the Second Amendment Angle
[Third times a charm but not 'l's.(as in L's or spells)]
Chant... Bane(or)Change! Bane(or)Change! Bane(or)Change!

Bane

Or(...), Change ?

Yet I caution*: careful of an October Surprise.

* in con text

Speaking of Sarcasm

Opinion: Critics and Foreign Policy.
Will Imam Abdul Rauf be taken for his word?

A Cult Classic.

It seems that intolerance is a lack of faith, yet that does not mean that a minority is right. 'Nuff said? Well, intolerance should be opposed, but that is the paradox. Especially when the intolerant see the intolerance for intolerance and think they are about tolerance. If the vicious cycle cannot be seen, then check the definition of faith, especially in one's own beliefs.

Missing thought

I am still trying to recover thought B, of labor day weak*. But it could be that I hit it already. The Bush tax cuts have failed to provide the jobs they were intended to, and they add to the debt. If this is not clear, there is big job market for people who think they know better.(sarcasm) BTW: war is a cost(Peace is an investment.)
[*italics indicate intentional spelling(missing sarcasm noted? sp! or sic = sarcasm in context)]

War is three letter word

which does not make it (or mean it is) over. .

Work is a four letter word.

Thank God for profits.
Herd this Mourning.
Note, spelling is intentional, and pardon my sarcasm or speaking in vein. Technically I have knot.

OK, back on track. Thanks to Stephanie Miller's replacement mooks or rather the callers.
A. recalling the Eisenhower tax rates regarding prosperity
B. (hold that thought)[*]
C. poll is a four letter word, darn, so is word.

B2.0 the thought...maybe that the argument that the debt is bad, can be addressed by slight adjustments in taxes, if tax breaks have been proven to not be sustainable and increase debt more than jobs...
See C? Politico is right! But is TPM left or wrong?

Speaking of the word, dove or hawk?

P.S. just because something works, does not mean it is good or bad, but you do the math. Speaking of Clean Ex! [Oh & the herd link was my last crack.]

[*] it may have been a different thought but much of this did not exactly flow directly. But basically, debt is bad, yet you can't make a four letter word** out of taxes. And war did not exactly get us out of anything, without paying for it.
**The word is anecdotal as a tissue** of prosperity & tax rates.
*** nor g**gle

In Balance...

Re: prized.
I thought McClatchy was a reliable publication, but I want to be careful not to think different based on one article or journalist.(or 2) Another reportedly reputable source (FiveThirtyEight)may have more perspective or less*.
*not to dis one or the other article or source but: Reputable is in the eye of the beholder, reliable is in the light of reality. We shall see.

[SEE Comment:(*...*) speaking of sources... a flip-flop. See The Blaze and the "Stand."]

[Or I could be lost in the media error that:
Obama = Black Liberation Theology = Catholic Liberation History And BINGO!
The problem is the fullness of Obama's Christianity.
(OK, this is my paraphrase and progression, but technically accurate.)

[Pre date and update. Happy Labor Day!]

(*...*)Notes major segue: from first comment to second, as the "he" in latter is Glenn Beck, which represents leap from Glenn Beck's famous trinity to actual justice in our society.

As the Inner Tubes

Move me...
speaking of spirit or editing/updating/searching*...
Nuf(f) said?** (link added and spell checked)

* I was going to use a brand name for "searching",but will try to use natural verbs or nouns, like tissue not Kl**nex.
[and in my "searching" for "discipline" I brought up a missing link in more than one way.
**(I really did not know where I had employed the term (nuff said) earlier, when I employed it here.]
[but if I may coin: Inner Tubes above.]

Duoh!

Alan Simpson must remain on the Debt Commission until two things occur, journalism gets its act together and people realize he is representing how some Republicans and others on the right actually think. On the first point, he certainly livens up the opportunity for bringing things to light, unfortunately it is not being done by the media(present company excepted-see labels. And just because (other)topics are being discussed and Social Security is being considered if not confused in this regard, does not mean that the commission is the one that will decide what will be done. It should be like brain storming, and while there may be thunder, some are not exactly lightening.
[This based on only one of the three source.]

Running Thoughts

PC v. PP
Peace Culture v. Power Points?
{"stand in the burning bush"}*
[Turning the Page]
[Honoring the Message]
Almost 'nuff said...(dot,dot,dot)

*post comment link inserted(not to agree with the theology)But note the possible separation of spiritual and material, the church and state, and reality of subjective and objective.

Parson Perspective

(titles selected before the last blog post written,
but Huffington Post viewed first.)
(Not to pick a number or perspective...)

Parsing Combat

{Bracketed (next) with both titles written before this blog post begins and this is not finished.}

Dennis Kucinich said something recently, which rankled me

"peace is inevitable".

I do not believe it is. Peace is "hard work"!

Having yet to hear(or read) the whole speech , the above "Parsing" refers to other's (Norman Goldman) comments.[I may continue to parse.]