It is almost hard to believe that Governor Mark Sanford has a book in the works. Many might cry, already? But no, it was already in the works.
Its title: "Within Our Means".
I guess it depends on what means means.[... and within the latter means "roundly mocked" is The Word "noncensus"]
Thursday, July 02, 2009
Wednesday, July 01, 2009
The Magic Number?
The Al Franken Show.
No! I mean We Got Ed! [*** UPDATE]
From the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy to the Great Left Wing Muddle, the magic number might be 41. That could be the answer to the not so rhetorical question, will the Democrats come through? With what? I presume a public plan. [update: 7-2-09] Unfortunately the filibuster is only a Senate tool and a naysayer* of nattering nabobs.
* a mixed rhetoric if not metaphor of political calculus
** update aka misnomer and new misnewmer.
*** 7-2-09 MSNBC link added with Ed's focus on the public plan over giving Al Franken a hard time about his 60th Senator comment.
No! I mean We Got Ed! [*** UPDATE]
From the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy to the Great Left Wing Muddle, the magic number might be 41. That could be the answer to the not so rhetorical question, will the Democrats come through? With what? I presume a public plan. [update: 7-2-09] Unfortunately the filibuster is only a Senate tool and a naysayer* of nattering nabobs.
* a mixed rhetoric if not metaphor of political calculus
** update aka misnomer and new misnewmer.
*** 7-2-09 MSNBC link added with Ed's focus on the public plan over giving Al Franken a hard time about his 60th Senator comment.
Confusion is Right
But it does not mean the left is cleared.
above links in order:
(1) Iran and Leftist Confusion by Reese Erlich
(2) Iran: The World Is Watching by Steve Weissman
(3) A Response to Steve Weissman's "Nonviolence 101" by Stephen Zunes
truthout / Perspective(s)
It should be clear that nuclear weapons proliferation (little did I know it was so little mentioned**) is the underlying concern.
"Some demonstrators wanted a more moderate Islamic government. Others advocated a separation of mosque and state, and a return to parliamentary democracy they had before the 1953 coup. But virtually everyone believes that Iran has the right to develop nuclear power, including enriching uranium. Iranians support the Palestinians in their fight against Israeli occupation, and they want to see the US get out of Iraq."(1)
"...criticizing US policy on Iran, including Bush administration efforts to overthrow the Islamic government. The US raises a series of phony issues, or exaggerates problems, in an effort to impose its domination on Iran. (Examples include Iran's nuclear power program, support for Hamas and Hezbollah, and support for Shiite groups in Iraq.)"(1)
(4) Iran: Nonviolence 101
"the Iranian activists want to win. At least some in the America government might prefer to provoke a brutal defeat, a Tiananmen Square, to further isolate Iran and bring pressure within the Obama administration for a military response to the Iranian nuclear program."(4)
"Washington's promotion of non-violent resistance in other countries is already casting suspicion on a number of activists and thinkers who, wittingly or not, have allowed themselves to become pawns in open and covert programs to "promote democracy." Non-violent activists everywhere need to draw a clear line against cooperating with governments of any stripe in this foreign meddling."(4)
"The leftist critics must answer the question: Whose side are you on?"(1)
President Obama's or proliferationists? The world's or being right? These are my cherry branches or olive pits.* Just as it is unclear who the leader of Iran is, aside from the election, so is it a more muddled group than coalition of the willing, that must be part of the solution.
*rhetorical answers and the muddled willing
** hence the fourth link
above links in order:
(1) Iran and Leftist Confusion by Reese Erlich
(2) Iran: The World Is Watching by Steve Weissman
(3) A Response to Steve Weissman's "Nonviolence 101" by Stephen Zunes
truthout / Perspective(s)
It should be clear that nuclear weapons proliferation (little did I know it was so little mentioned**) is the underlying concern.
"Some demonstrators wanted a more moderate Islamic government. Others advocated a separation of mosque and state, and a return to parliamentary democracy they had before the 1953 coup. But virtually everyone believes that Iran has the right to develop nuclear power, including enriching uranium. Iranians support the Palestinians in their fight against Israeli occupation, and they want to see the US get out of Iraq."(1)
"...criticizing US policy on Iran, including Bush administration efforts to overthrow the Islamic government. The US raises a series of phony issues, or exaggerates problems, in an effort to impose its domination on Iran. (Examples include Iran's nuclear power program, support for Hamas and Hezbollah, and support for Shiite groups in Iraq.)"(1)
(4) Iran: Nonviolence 101
"the Iranian activists want to win. At least some in the America government might prefer to provoke a brutal defeat, a Tiananmen Square, to further isolate Iran and bring pressure within the Obama administration for a military response to the Iranian nuclear program."(4)
"Washington's promotion of non-violent resistance in other countries is already casting suspicion on a number of activists and thinkers who, wittingly or not, have allowed themselves to become pawns in open and covert programs to "promote democracy." Non-violent activists everywhere need to draw a clear line against cooperating with governments of any stripe in this foreign meddling."(4)
"The leftist critics must answer the question: Whose side are you on?"(1)
President Obama's or proliferationists? The world's or being right? These are my cherry branches or olive pits.* Just as it is unclear who the leader of Iran is, aside from the election, so is it a more muddled group than coalition of the willing, that must be part of the solution.
*rhetorical answers and the muddled willing
** hence the fourth link
Tuesday, June 30, 2009
Monday, June 29, 2009
Voodoo Economics Redux?
Or is it Tri-ducks, not in a row.
Not really meaning third times a charm, but that it ducks the question and begs the future. Calculations cannot be made based on terms of infinity, it should seem. The faux principle of gravity or trickle down or Laffer curve should not be calculable without understanding of the curve if not calculus.
[The reference to the Laffer curve is the assumptions that differ based on which side of the bell curve one is on when changes are made. It would seem that their might be a similar point if not additional principle or missing factor that could make any argument based on "generational accounting" irrelevant.]
[Tri-Ducks would be Re 3 Govs: Reagan, Bush and Sanford.*]
* this is not meant to be funny but I am simultaneously ahead of the curve as well as behind Think Progress in linking the pre-post or us.(meaning I found the link post post.)
[7-6-09: update ]
Not really meaning third times a charm, but that it ducks the question and begs the future. Calculations cannot be made based on terms of infinity, it should seem. The faux principle of gravity or trickle down or Laffer curve should not be calculable without understanding of the curve if not calculus.
[The reference to the Laffer curve is the assumptions that differ based on which side of the bell curve one is on when changes are made. It would seem that their might be a similar point if not additional principle or missing factor that could make any argument based on "generational accounting" irrelevant.]
[Tri-Ducks would be Re 3 Govs: Reagan, Bush and Sanford.*]
* this is not meant to be funny but I am simultaneously ahead of the curve as well as behind Think Progress in linking the pre-post or us.(meaning I found the link post post.)
[7-6-09: update ]
Cap and Trade?
[American Clean Energy and Security Act: Waxman/Markey Bill [** correction below]
Energy Bill narrowly passes House.(Carol Browner: White House Energy Advisor)
The Progress Report at Think Progress.
It seems that if the criticisms this energy plan, as well as that of the public component(The Ed Show) of health care reform have any merit, it will mean that there is no invisible hand of the market. If the competition that a not-for-profit health care option provides will do in the insurance industry, and if a market solution to incentivize pollution reduction is not feasible, then the market might not be the arena that solutions can be found. Maybe the solution would then be found in demand side economics. And given the compromises that comprise the effort to be non-partisan[*], further amendments should be well considered as to not weaken the progress or threaten failure, as further pressure for change might result.
[*]link linked post-post
[Pre-post err us missing link? generational accounting. Suffice to say: accounting is not economics nor math accounting...for values, let alone the right "scoring".]
[6-30-09: See Voodoo Economics Redux?
and "a new clean energy economy"]
[** Waxman-Markey Climate Change Bill or another misnomer aka H.R. 2454]
Energy Bill narrowly passes House.(Carol Browner: White House Energy Advisor)
The Progress Report at Think Progress.
It seems that if the criticisms this energy plan, as well as that of the public component(The Ed Show) of health care reform have any merit, it will mean that there is no invisible hand of the market. If the competition that a not-for-profit health care option provides will do in the insurance industry, and if a market solution to incentivize pollution reduction is not feasible, then the market might not be the arena that solutions can be found. Maybe the solution would then be found in demand side economics. And given the compromises that comprise the effort to be non-partisan[*], further amendments should be well considered as to not weaken the progress or threaten failure, as further pressure for change might result.
[*]link linked post-post
[Pre-post err us missing link? generational accounting. Suffice to say: accounting is not economics nor math accounting...for values, let alone the right "scoring".]
[6-30-09: See Voodoo Economics Redux?
and "a new clean energy economy"]
[** Waxman-Markey Climate Change Bill or another misnomer aka H.R. 2454]
Saturday, June 27, 2009
Thursday, June 25, 2009
Morning JOE(LT) of Fair and Balanced
Congratulations Chris Matthews for holding the level playing field on health care*. Not to mention how careful polls are used.
* Robert Reich argues for the public plan in this second link, but Matthews more than tips the field away from "member(s) of the media" asking questions toward being "get done". Public concern does not mean opposition to addressing them with a public plan. More people (79%-84%) are concerned with the quality, cost, choice and the deficit than support a public plan, but that makes them concerned not overriding or "right wingers" of the 76% for a public plan. They also support President Obama more than 2 to 1 over Republicans on health care reform. In fact no specific plan is associated with either the public's concerns or the president's approval over health care reform.
* Robert Reich argues for the public plan in this second link, but Matthews more than tips the field away from "member(s) of the media" asking questions toward being "get done". Public concern does not mean opposition to addressing them with a public plan. More people (79%-84%) are concerned with the quality, cost, choice and the deficit than support a public plan, but that makes them concerned not overriding or "right wingers" of the 76% for a public plan. They also support President Obama more than 2 to 1 over Republicans on health care reform. In fact no specific plan is associated with either the public's concerns or the president's approval over health care reform.
Monday, June 22, 2009
"they trust themselves"
Greider/Moyers on the Geitner Plan
coining power
words to progress by
[The title is a sublation of context from the first link transected by earlier work: Adam Smith the so-called father of capitalism not only wrote The Wealth of Nations but The Theory of Moral Sentiments. BTW: socialism was coined as a reaction to this new economics (pardon the pun) To Read: The Insurgents: The Secret Battle To Save Capitalism and The Capitalist Manifesto: Greed Is Good]
[6-24-09: related tangents* Tikkun at thy word]
[ * previous Tikkun intersection and quibbling over meanings and jobs(**). For context. Actual To Read . "Only I am president."]
[Hint: under meanings Newt Gingrich has a lecture series to dissect a straw dog or is he pickling red herrings.]
(** speaking of tea partier the Daily News is in Wonderland)
coining power
words to progress by
[The title is a sublation of context from the first link transected by earlier work: Adam Smith the so-called father of capitalism not only wrote The Wealth of Nations but The Theory of Moral Sentiments. BTW: socialism was coined as a reaction to this new economics (pardon the pun) To Read: The Insurgents: The Secret Battle To Save Capitalism and The Capitalist Manifesto: Greed Is Good]
[6-24-09: related tangents* Tikkun at thy word]
[ * previous Tikkun intersection and quibbling over meanings and jobs(**). For context. Actual To Read . "Only I am president."]
[Hint: under meanings Newt Gingrich has a lecture series to dissect a straw dog or is he pickling red herrings.]
(** speaking of tea partier the Daily News is in Wonderland)
Thursday, June 18, 2009
Make it so.
No Captain Picard.
Some think President Obama has done too much already. Others think he has not done enough. The problem, is they are on both sides of the partisan divide. Some don't even understand the divide. Tea Party goers are a good example. Spurred by Libertarians and encouraged by the further right (or wrong) "just say no" crowd. Another good example is the stimulus package. "It was too much." [* update correction] Yet only a portion has gotten out yet. Which some confuse with the bailout, and others the budget or fiscal responsibility. Even bankruptcy is not recognized as a process rather than an end.
But I think that one of the main ideas in the slow rate of change for some social and legal issues is the balance of powers. Congress makes laws and the executive should follow them. Sometimes by not following them, the laws are changed, and sometimes by following them. It would not really be non-partisan or even good for a party, if the Justice Department did not do its job with the laws it has or the executive get too involved in changing them beyond his actual power to execute them.
The other is that the president has an agenda. To fix the economy, by focusing on education, energy and health care reform, and to be a leader in the world that the world can follow. He is not the bringer or breaker of laws, but he is burdened with alot on the table including a congress that is not of one mind, even if it has a partisan majority.
[The above commentary was completed before I found this on top of my inbox. Along with the complications of checks and balances designed into our constitution and the partisan and corporate aspects not so specially mentioned, it is ironic that a free press is mentioned. Yet such must be especially carefully balanced in times of crisis and change, in particular when it comes to national security, diplomacy and markets. Congress shall make no laws, in regards to certain freedoms, yet the executive is not free to give rights or free all information.]
[6-19-09: No Buddha either.]
[* 6-14-11: update correction: quotation marks added, not that it is a quote.]
Some think President Obama has done too much already. Others think he has not done enough. The problem, is they are on both sides of the partisan divide. Some don't even understand the divide. Tea Party goers are a good example. Spurred by Libertarians and encouraged by the further right (or wrong) "just say no" crowd. Another good example is the stimulus package. "It was too much." [* update correction] Yet only a portion has gotten out yet. Which some confuse with the bailout, and others the budget or fiscal responsibility. Even bankruptcy is not recognized as a process rather than an end.
But I think that one of the main ideas in the slow rate of change for some social and legal issues is the balance of powers. Congress makes laws and the executive should follow them. Sometimes by not following them, the laws are changed, and sometimes by following them. It would not really be non-partisan or even good for a party, if the Justice Department did not do its job with the laws it has or the executive get too involved in changing them beyond his actual power to execute them.
The other is that the president has an agenda. To fix the economy, by focusing on education, energy and health care reform, and to be a leader in the world that the world can follow. He is not the bringer or breaker of laws, but he is burdened with alot on the table including a congress that is not of one mind, even if it has a partisan majority.
[The above commentary was completed before I found this on top of my inbox. Along with the complications of checks and balances designed into our constitution and the partisan and corporate aspects not so specially mentioned, it is ironic that a free press is mentioned. Yet such must be especially carefully balanced in times of crisis and change, in particular when it comes to national security, diplomacy and markets. Congress shall make no laws, in regards to certain freedoms, yet the executive is not free to give rights or free all information.]
[6-19-09: No Buddha either.]
[* 6-14-11: update correction: quotation marks added, not that it is a quote.]
Monday, June 15, 2009
Dividing Not Uniting
[Held in draft since 6-12-09]
Republican Study Committee needs more study.
While some factions blame Obama for bailouts, another blames him for not standing with holdouts for a bailout.
Meanwhile Palin starts a war on comedy as an expert on double standards. What started as a reasonable admonition to David Letterman who made a disparaging joke that did implicate her under aged daughter, soon bordered on pandering violence. While this is a big stretch from Letterman not wanting to be caught "off guard", it is more innuendoed than the error of the joke(which daughter) distracting from its original distastefulness(to daughters in general*). Now will Palin go after Death Talkers or will Letterman go more political shock jock or start a blog?
It is my opinion that Letterman should apologize for the jokes erroneous implication and the overall distastefulness of the subject.[**] Then Palin should work on her fellow partisans and "so-called" conservative "leaders", be they elected or sponsored in their "free" speech; in particular surrounding the improper use of words like socialism and racism and the irony and empathy of Alaskan ownership of resources. If she could make as good a showing with her "so-called" friends, it would be a service to her party and the nation.
* the original distastefulness was more standard fare for late night yet the error aside, other exaggerations have been made in making this an issue about women.[These two links were found and inserted after I finished this post. But I think there is a general hazzard in communication that transcends humor or could actual be a key ingrediant that is often missed. If one takes the word "slutty" and recognizes it as an adjective and not part of the noun, one might not be so quick to empathize as a victim.] [late read]
[**] to a great extent he has, but I mean acknowledging the error and not unreasonable offense taken by the daughter actually at the game (at least until it was made "hey" of)
[Later 6-15-09 follow-up Letterman Boost and word out that Letterman will re-apologize.]
[6-16-09: Palin accepts apology and evolution.]
[Further RE:Devolution On CBS]
Republican Study Committee needs more study.
While some factions blame Obama for bailouts, another blames him for not standing with holdouts for a bailout.
Meanwhile Palin starts a war on comedy as an expert on double standards. What started as a reasonable admonition to David Letterman who made a disparaging joke that did implicate her under aged daughter, soon bordered on pandering violence. While this is a big stretch from Letterman not wanting to be caught "off guard", it is more innuendoed than the error of the joke(which daughter) distracting from its original distastefulness(to daughters in general*). Now will Palin go after Death Talkers or will Letterman go more political shock jock or start a blog?
It is my opinion that Letterman should apologize for the jokes erroneous implication and the overall distastefulness of the subject.[**] Then Palin should work on her fellow partisans and "so-called" conservative "leaders", be they elected or sponsored in their "free" speech; in particular surrounding the improper use of words like socialism and racism and the irony and empathy of Alaskan ownership of resources. If she could make as good a showing with her "so-called" friends, it would be a service to her party and the nation.
* the original distastefulness was more standard fare for late night yet the error aside, other exaggerations have been made in making this an issue about women.[These two links were found and inserted after I finished this post. But I think there is a general hazzard in communication that transcends humor or could actual be a key ingrediant that is often missed. If one takes the word "slutty" and recognizes it as an adjective and not part of the noun, one might not be so quick to empathize as a victim.] [late read]
[**] to a great extent he has, but I mean acknowledging the error and not unreasonable offense taken by the daughter actually at the game (at least until it was made "hey" of)
[Later 6-15-09 follow-up Letterman Boost and word out that Letterman will re-apologize.]
[6-16-09: Palin accepts apology and evolution.]
[Further RE:Devolution On CBS]
Friday, June 12, 2009
Dividing Not Uniting.(saved as draft)
[POSTED 6-15-09: UNTIL THEN HELD IN DRAFT]
Republican Study Committee needs more study.
While some factions blame Obama for bailouts, another blames him for not standing with holdouts for a bailout.
Meanwhile Palin starts a war on comedy as an expert on double standards... (full read)
Republican Study Committee needs more study.
While some factions blame Obama for bailouts, another blames him for not standing with holdouts for a bailout.
Meanwhile Palin starts a war on comedy as an expert on double standards... (full read)
Thursday, June 11, 2009
Tuesday, June 09, 2009
Monday, June 08, 2009
Palin Reviving FDR!
"My friends, we need to be aware..."
Not Exactly.[*] "...I fear."
And pin the tale?
[Link "unprededented" updated below, and attention to Gorelick - Memo][Not to mention Charlie McCarthyism]
[Update also: Defeat By George and A Democratic World? refreshing links to Defeat - commondreams.org A Democratic World - The New Yorker ]
[*] 6-9-09 "the only thing we have to fear..."
Not Exactly.[*] "...I fear."
And pin the tale?
[Link "unprededented" updated below, and attention to Gorelick - Memo][Not to mention Charlie McCarthyism]
[Update also: Defeat By George and A Democratic World? refreshing links to Defeat - commondreams.org A Democratic World - The New Yorker ]
[*] 6-9-09 "the only thing we have to fear..."
Friday, June 05, 2009
The Speech
"A New Beginning"
[6-6-09 to be considered:
Kennedy Health Insurace Bill Erica Werner AP - truthout
What promise in Cairo? Robert Naiman- truthout
Privatized Obama's War Michael Winship - truthout
The Bully Pulpit? Steve Weissman - truthout
Mean-pathy Dr. Wilmer Leon III - truthout]
[6-6-09 to be considered:
Kennedy Health Insurace Bill Erica Werner AP - truthout
What promise in Cairo? Robert Naiman- truthout
Privatized Obama's War Michael Winship - truthout
The Bully Pulpit? Steve Weissman - truthout
Mean-pathy Dr. Wilmer Leon III - truthout]
Wednesday, June 03, 2009
Revolutionary Update
Now this is spin. Psycho Spin.
Meanwhile the certain programs and their guests should be charged with terrorism and torture of intelligence. Are civil charges warranted? What about corporate responsibility and the death penalty? Not to mention corporate marriage and incest? As long as I am flaming, smoke and mirrors maybe a tack for the unlikely partners in the same sex fight would be the nature of corporate personhood and interstate commerce. I believe their strategy has something to do with equal protection, but would it be possible to tie in the issues of incorporation and interstate commerce rights? And given Cheney's use of intelligence, he certainly doesn't help many causes.
Meanwhile the certain programs and their guests should be charged with terrorism and torture of intelligence. Are civil charges warranted? What about corporate responsibility and the death penalty? Not to mention corporate marriage and incest? As long as I am flaming, smoke and mirrors maybe a tack for the unlikely partners in the same sex fight would be the nature of corporate personhood and interstate commerce. I believe their strategy has something to do with equal protection, but would it be possible to tie in the issues of incorporation and interstate commerce rights? And given Cheney's use of intelligence, he certainly doesn't help many causes.
Tuesday, June 02, 2009
Trying Harder...
"this week in Cairo"
Steve Weissman, TruthOut / Perspective
and National Health Plan.
Chris Frates, Politico
[Health Care for America Now -
Physicians for a National Health Program ]
[Update: 6-2-09- exactly, 6-2-09 - The Two Faces of Opposition ]
[Preemptive Sessions: Sotomayor faces her first contact with those responsible for her confirmation. Needless to say, her "poor choice of words" will be the focus of the debate on judicial philosophy. And it is a small matter to stick with that story but also expand upon our principles without taking it to the level of a lecture series. See dynamics]
[And Pawlenty please] is not running for re-election but...]
Steve Weissman, TruthOut / Perspective
and National Health Plan.
Chris Frates, Politico
[Health Care for America Now -
Physicians for a National Health Program ]
[Update: 6-2-09- exactly, 6-2-09 - The Two Faces of Opposition ]
[Preemptive Sessions: Sotomayor faces her first contact with those responsible for her confirmation. Needless to say, her "poor choice of words" will be the focus of the debate on judicial philosophy. And it is a small matter to stick with that story but also expand upon our principles without taking it to the level of a lecture series. See dynamics]
[And Pawlenty please] is not running for re-election but...]
Monday, June 01, 2009
"just supposed to 'call balls and strikes'-"
Sotomayor on the letter of the law.
A Smile to Set the GOP on Edge.
by Eugene Robinson, The Washington Post
Empathy, Sotomayor, and Democracy: The Conservative Stealth Strategy
by George Lakoff, TruthOut / Perspective
The logic of perspective and experience demonstrates the dynamics of interpretation. The framing of the question under the dynamics link almost makes moot the need to follow the arguments that supposedly "demolish" the supremacy of the courts, yet seems to demostrate the spirit of the law over the letter of the law. That being the dymamics of the power to the people and the foundations of justice in the constitution. It seems that it is only in the lack of the people to call into question a law that it not find itself before the court.
[And before one points out that there is no spirit of the law in the constitution, neither is there the word "letter" or "balls or strikes", let alone "policy" or "corporation", except in the privacy policy of the web page.] Without the spirit of the law as interpreted and argued by all three branches for the people, there is no foundation or principle let alone moral high ground for our exceptionalism.]
[6-2-09: ThinkProgress.org The Two Faces of Opposition ]
A Smile to Set the GOP on Edge.
by Eugene Robinson, The Washington Post
Empathy, Sotomayor, and Democracy: The Conservative Stealth Strategy
by George Lakoff, TruthOut / Perspective
The logic of perspective and experience demonstrates the dynamics of interpretation. The framing of the question under the dynamics link almost makes moot the need to follow the arguments that supposedly "demolish" the supremacy of the courts, yet seems to demostrate the spirit of the law over the letter of the law. That being the dymamics of the power to the people and the foundations of justice in the constitution. It seems that it is only in the lack of the people to call into question a law that it not find itself before the court.
[And before one points out that there is no spirit of the law in the constitution, neither is there the word "letter" or "balls or strikes", let alone "policy" or "corporation", except in the privacy policy of the web page.] Without the spirit of the law as interpreted and argued by all three branches for the people, there is no foundation or principle let alone moral high ground for our exceptionalism.]
[6-2-09: ThinkProgress.org The Two Faces of Opposition ]
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)