Not 2...

round up [!] *

* bold read

(Pardon the construction, and legend lagging.  Bold indicates actually read.) 

WP: UN Gaza War Crimes
WP:  Abandoning Globalization
Time:  Charleston Terrorism

(b.s.) bold+read *
(fb/Time)
(bold+s.+c.) a, b, C. Calm Pend E Um  , D. Realmiffication , E. HELP NAVIGATION .
(share+'n+angle+read)a, b, C. File of sorts.

(You scroll/click & see right column for Pages/Archives)

[Ron Paul v Fed(~)Obama w/ Marc Maron]
{Not to pun on too.} 
[pitch, putt, punt]

Already Red[!]

Akin too Read[!]
Yet too read.*

* Bold= Read, Italics=intent or priority to read

Not to 4mool8, but there are taxes, expenditures and debt in the picture.  Rates do not equal gross, except in outcome. 

Farce Book & Irony.

Location, location, location.

" Sources, sources, sources [!]" 
Not to parse ... nor tangent.

(FP1)*

* yet to post Footnotes Page One(June, '14)
Asterisk(1) pulled from b.s.@[!] (i.e. blog search) May the source BwU.

My original crack~ refers to references and sharing.  It is not conceivable that some could read all the material they** share on social networks.  To be less obtuse, there are sources read, sources cherry picked, and sources quilted. 
(to be continued)***
draft:
Bold = read 
italics=more to read
** Courier = at this juncture b. s. *
*** see labels
~ last insert
[On the matter of reading this...(not yet) but also see italic nor, yet recall D.D. Runes !]

[FP1 redate 6-14-14]

Reducks[!] in a row.

Supreme Court Jest Ice?

Where is the ice going? Well here is where it is coming from:

The New Yorker*: Rational Irrationality.

Well, not exactly: Obamacare Supreme Court Case is a Bad Joke.

Actually I will be intentionally preemptive**.

Is it some form of martial arts political calculus?

Maybe I have too much hope for Obama or too much faith in The New Yorker.

Bottom line, I have yet to read the article, but wanted to jump*** on the band wagon.(NOT!)

Not to make a federal case out of it, but I do intend to read more on this later.

* not that I have read it yet, but I like the heading.

** Jujitsu before reading.

*** case study[!] Reid sarcastic[!] Me...not read[!]

(also see "federal": not to mention Romney on Russia and Leno.)

[Seattle Times ]

[3-29-12 ALEC: Stand your Ground, Supreme Court Activism/ both sans comment.]

[Follow-up:

Seattle Excerpts, interesting hodge-podge of exchanges. If the constitution is not a living document, what is federalism? Killing two ironies in one comment?

Justice Antonin Scalia: Mr. Kneedler, what happened to the Eighth Amendment? You really want us to go through these 2,700 pages? And do you really expect the court to do that? Or do you expect us to give this function to our law clerks? Is this not totally unrealistic? That we're going to go through this enormous bill item by item and decide each one?

Deputy Solicitor General Edwin Kneedler: Well ...

Times "seemingly split over ideology"/

But Roberts and Kennedy also asked enough pointed questions of the law's challengers to give the overhaul's supporters some hope. In any event, justices' questions at arguments do not always foretell their positions.

Activism: "Justices Split".

Intentionally: Read Healthcare Jujitsu, Political Jujitsu, what's the difference? The party and the people. It would seem to me that Obama is the master, even without single payer as a goal. It might be called "free market" jujitsu where that is what could be flipped by even an option. The "free market" economic fantasy is under threat of being flipped as the fraud it is, under even the offer of competition. Maybe there is the jest ice.

Tangent of the day.^

[See original lede: Bingo on Faith, in paragraph two. Almost Bingo cubed !^^]

^ now that is an irony

^^ see bold "two" link re:cubed, but apologies for last four links.^^^

^^^ or penta coastal or cost us [!]

[Fixing News: as opposed to breaking, I must update the Fixing . But what kind of market is it when if you don't participate you die? Ask Raw Money. On the other hand, he is correct: "We can't play the game like that." Let alone are banking and insurance really commerce? I they aren't, maybe they aren't people, maybe they are Leviathan? i.e. governments bailiwick or not!][Ed on Hannity: the journalist calling the journalist read, or the con calling the convict con(pot meet kettle/camel meet domino) ]

[3-30-12 Justices Meet...

Book Review De...viewed... not to put a spin or pun on it. But I will depun a bit on the self-fulfilling profits. ]

Carry On Comment!

Borrowed from an AM1090 caller to one of the afternoon talk shows, the interesting dilemma of Karl Rove is his confessing apparently...

that he has no diary or record of his work with the administration.

This with his apparent plan to write a book, means...

either he has a very good memory or it will be in the fiction section.

Actually I just rearranged the caller's comment to my own taste in my usual way.

His point was that it takes "I don't recall" and all it's variations "off the table" when it comes to congressional investigations.
I would add
the only alternative
is straight to "the pen".

More lines of investigation on Rove history
For later read, not that I have read the above.
"...who know what"
Democrats vow...
political fighter
Picking Bush's Brain ?
...avoid Capitol Hill
WaPo editorial

[pause]
Clinton, Rove's candidate in '08
U.S. Attorneys
First Read
Divider

[Having just read the last one first, it is a reminder that his nickname "turd blossom" is something that survives in a field of fertilizer.]

[Second thoughts on First Thoughts from First Read: There should NEVER be another Karl Rove. It is a cheap shot and a Vast Right Wing Conspiracy to promulgate such a character [italics and link added 8-15-07]by looking for the next one.

At least they admitted that "they" (the media) create them (the turd blossoms), but of course there will be, on the Right, as several of his (Rove's) proteges are distributed amongst the Republican candidates. But on The Left there is too much distribution of brains to get away with anything like what the administration has so far distributed. Genius should be about what works, and nothing much has, with this administration, except accumulation of ruin and power. * [it.a.l.a. 8-15-07]
Shame on MSNBC for such work. There is some good news on the new Hillary ad, but to follow with a piece on Rove? And while running the bottom line, "the next Karl Rove" under "her inner Bill".]

* [8-15-07 Re: David Frum link "and power", reminiscent of Lakoff where he points out that the difference between Democrats and Republicans is that the former run to govern, and the latter govern to run. That may say as much about governing as running, and as much about the left as the right, but rather than looking for a third way in the middle of any political spectrum, maybe the perspective [way to see it] is from above the plane, while a plane requires a third perspective that is not in line.]

[ bold italics added 3-12-08]

Can you feel this working?

Or even follow this thinking?* Is George Lakoff practicing the same reinforcment and fine print? On the feeling front ? **

Does the market Lord over Republicans?
Does logic Lord over facts?
Is it really the slippery slope Lakoff sees?

The bold indicates the suggested read. Links are often footnotes or tangents(see [**] ), not primary sources that need a full read. I am commenting here on different results that reading this article may have on those from different parts of the political spectrum, and the impact of having read it on their perspective of their perspective.[*]
(You will have to read the Lakoff article, and then will you be prepared to answer the questions?) The focus on the metaphorical may have an underlying greater impact. The President is pounding on the pragmatics of values and that may be an over arching message.

*The Santorum Strategy by George Lakoff
** unembedded mixed front and other
*** (temp tech difficulties w/links: see footnotes)

Footnotes
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Ant_and_the_Grasshopper
Point: Metaphors evolve or are hijacked. (flip-flop over the centuries)
http://political_progress_for_people.blogspot.com/search?q=snob
Point: Pop Culture? Pontifical Santorum?
Concepts:
http://political_progress_for_people.blogspot.com/search?q=Republican+table
http://political_progress_for_people.blogspot.com/search?q=divide+to+table
too http://political_progress_for_people.blogspot.com/search?q=conquer

These last links found on Footnotes PAGE. (A, B, C)
http://political_progress_for_people.blogspot.com/p/footnotes.html

[*] last asterisk to note that these two "perspective" links are tangential[**] perspectives on perspectives.
[**] speaking of dump ties? (see *** ttdl See placement of link/asterisk inconvenience. )
[Related Breaking Toure on KONY 2012 (3-18-12 update)]
[Related Background: http://fora.tv/2007/06/28/Francis_Fukuyama_End_Of_History_Revisited ]
[And Martin Bashir: "but what am I?" Romney childishness.]
[Citizens United: http://political_progress_for_people.blogspot.com/search?q=Citizens+United,
http://political_progress_for_people.blogspot.com/search?q=Strategy+of+right,
http://political_progress_for_people.blogspot.com/search?q=Koch+Brothers,
http://political_progress_for_people.blogspot.com/search?q=Roger+Ailes, purpose of these inconvenient (see *** & ttld) links, is to archive and find later reference to the divide further the table for their conversation. http://political_progress_for_people.blogspot.com/search?q=Koch+Table,
http://political_progress_for_people.blogspot.com/2011/10/karl-rove-vs-wa-hyperbole.html,
http://political_progress_for_people.blogspot.com/2011/10/politics-of-table.html, More Bashir: http://political_progress_for_people.blogspot.com/search?q=Pee+Wee , http://political_progress_for_people.blogspot.com/search?q=Herman ,
Happy Birthday Romney http://political_progress_for_people.blogspot.com/2010/03/snooki.html, Infinity http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XOGWbzUM-y8 ]

Bush the United

Bush the Unitary*

The founding fathers are blue, or at least purple, meaning they are rolling over in their graves with sadness if not hopping mad. This image began as an intent to remedially read the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution by highlighting it in color for those that need help standing up for the principles contained in them. America should really be red as in the color of anger that the Republicans accuse Democrats of being full of. Doubly red for the embarrassment that we are exporting "so called Democracy" while undermining it at home.

A little color in their cheeks should be left over for the "so called Liberal Media" which if it were really so liberal, would be shouting from the roof tops or at least on all networks about a law suit brought by a few in Congress suing Bush for violating the Constitution by signing SB 1932 which that did not pass through the House. Not to mention the 750 laws that Bush has signed but noted he will not follow. OK...That is my slight exaggeration. The "he will not follow" not the number 750 necessarily (one is enough). These should be under the heading of Bush Pre-Justice, not to mention Pre-Legislate and Pre-Administration, and never mind chain of command. READ THIS:
Article II: Section 2. paragraphs 2 and 3

He shall have power, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, to make treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, shall appoint ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, judges of the Supreme Court, and all other officers of the United States, whose appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by law : but the Congress may by law vest the appointment of such inferior officers, as they think proper, in the President alone***, in the courts of law, or in the heads of departments.

The President shall have power to fill up all vacancies that may happen during the recess of the Senate, by granting commissions which shall expire at the end of their next session.

My bold and italics added instead of the color code that should insight(i).

It should be noted how much emphasis there is on the senate and the law regarding the powers of the executive. Rememeber how "philosophy" was so important in his selections for appointment, not to mention** loyalty.

* link added after the first two paragraphs posted here.

(i) = intentionally construed.

** link added last and is noted as not necessarily balanced and not fully read by myself but from what I did read, had already selected here the pertinent sections that refute.

*** It may be important to explain here (it seems) that these executive powers are only vested by law, by the senate, to whom they alone choose.

LeftyBlog?

I'm not on LeftyBlog because...
Maybe I don't like tests.
Or maybe only global tests of reality.
[FOR LOCAL CONTENT CLICK HERE : OR SEE LABEL LOCAL]
But a challenge?
This may be a work in progress.

[[BLOG LIST]]
[[LEFTYBLOG]]
[[WASHBLOG]]
[[Northwest Progressive Institute Blog]]
[[AMERICAinSOLIDARITY]]

If I label all my local material under the Local label, will that help? If I link and loop LeftyBlog to my post that helps the reader navigate, will that help?
Well this is not my usual rant, rave or ramble. Well yes it is, because I never know where I will go or end. But the challenge may be addressed by more questions answered by more questions?(see previous sentence)

Originally a look at the needs of LeftyBlog found this:

Remember, LeftyBlogs.com is for local progressive political blogs with original content. Some questions:

I did not mean to read it literally, I just did not include the questions in my cut and paste,(see un#d bullet point 4)of (a challenge) above , and then was so bold as to add bold to "connect the dots", where I will begin with the last first.[leap*] There I go again. (two tangents: not to read )
Then "all politics is local" and "politics is everything". Not to mention just not right.

OK, now I will go back and see if I can follow any of this.
LATER.

* I am tracking better, as I almost left off this quote by taking my tangent
[in the mean time, I put LEFTeBLOG at the top of my RIGHT list, where a typo fortuitously crept in]

[TheLiaisonReport - Between the mean and the out there.]
[Bottom Line: LOCAL CONTENT {UNDER CONSTRUCTION - more later}]

[[WE GOT ED!]]
[[Portland and Air America have Thom Hartmann]]

Why OWS is bigger than Left vs. Right.

Stuck in the game frame?
Bright Bart and Big Government?

Why OWS is bigger...

Tactically, what we'll see here will be a) people firmly on the traditional Democratic side claiming to speak for OWS, and b) people on the right-Republican side attempting to portray OWS as a puppet of well-known liberals and other Democratic interests.

Whine and G's?

On the Democratic side, we've already seen a lot of this behavior, particularly in the last week or so. Glenn Greenwald wrote about this a lot last week, talking about how Obama has already made it clear that he is "on the same side as the Wall Street protesters" and that the Democratic Party, through the DCCC (its House fundraising arm), has jumped into the fray by circulating a petition seeking 100,000 party supporters to affirm that "I stand with the Occupy Wall Street protests". (I wonder how firmly the DCCC was standing with OWS sentiment back when it was pushing for the bailouts and the repeal of Glass-Steagall Act).

Really?

What nobody is comfortable with is a movement in which virtually the entire spectrum of middle class and poor Americans is on the same page, railing against incestuous political and financial corruption on Wall Street and in Washington. The reality is that Occupy Wall Street and the millions of middle Americans who make up the Tea Party are natural allies and should be on the same page about most of the key issues, and that's a story our media won't want to or know how to handle.

Not your grandfather's "traditional".

This is an issue for the traditional "left" because it's a classic instance of overweening corporate power - but it's an issue for the traditional "right" because these same institutions are also the biggest welfare bums of all time, de facto wards of the state who sucked trillions of dollars of public treasure from the pockets of patriotic taxpayers from coast to coast

Really?

Both traditional constituencies want these companies off the public teat and back swimming on their own in the cruel seas of the free market, where they will inevitably be drowned in their corruption and greed, if they don't reform immediately. This is a major implicit complaint of the OWS protests and it should absolutely strike a nerve with Tea Partiers, many of whom were talking about some of the same things when they burst onto the scene a few years ago.

I have read Matt Taibbi's piece three times now over the course of parsing this, and I will let you read your own conclusions.

[Then I signed the petition at DCCC (see bold) "I stand..." with the following amendments.(see 3 links)]

[Each of the above blockquotes are directly from Matt Taibbi's piece, with the bold segues my comments. But the final Really?, "Both traditional constituencies want these companies off the public teat and back swimming on their own in the cruel seas of the free market, where they will inevitably be drowned in their corruption and greed, if they don't reform immediately." sounds a bit naive if not libertarian. Companies and Wall Street will not reform themselves any more than they will let themselves fail or let the market do its magic. But it is a matter of who's on board or overboard as well as some sort of tents.]
[Speaking of ironies, or Bright Bart and Big Government, just whose side is who on?]
[Meanwhile I have four posts to further parse. Starting with the big bite. @ 7 minutes 15 seconds in: Over two thirds of New Yorkers support Occupy Wall Street.]

[Oh what a web. No E.B. White:
SCroll up! Tol Keen? Rubric, Elements, what "October", Mis-attribute? Justice and/or sand witchbracket.]
[Alternative Reich? Not to pun on the furor, but is there an alternative?]
[A Democratic* strategist touched on something(on Martin Bashir) that has been embedded in my thoughts, and even more embedded in my writings. The Republican candidate will not come from the activist wing. And indeed the current leader often trails "anybody else". Well, they are not really polling that candidate, but the leaders are still struggling for less than a third of the Republican's votes(current Gallup Romney 20%). My point is that there just might be a compromise or coalition candidate. On the other hand... who am I to say democracy will prevail over the Republic?]
* 10-19-11 I have yet to find the proper link but place some others under Democratic Strategist and Martin Bashir.

Nobel Oblige

Prize and Prejudice Countdown with Steve Clemons [#4 The Nobel Savage]
The Myth of "America" truthout.com
Hope and Change
A New Climate
Training for Choice

Update: 8 Most Outrageous Attacks on Obama's Nobel Peace Prize
Borax Prize ***
[Embedded in my nomination* (Prize; which was a shot in the dark) was an "either or" diatribe by Charles Krauthammer. Decline is a Choice appropriately concluding with the words of Demosthenes:
...when asked what was to be done about the decline of Athens. His reply? "I will give what I believe is the fairest and truest answer: Don't do what you are doing now."
Given the hegemony or decline choice there must be no denial that Obama is not doing what we have been doing. But that is not the choice.]

* I have rendered in bold, read links. And nominated the Borax Prize as the Un-Nobel Prize {comment pending review, or hit a snag}

[Update: Put in con text. Obama lambasts major faiths.**
And surmize. Our Reagan. ]

** a pun on con_text
*** 10-14-09 Renamed: Borax Award

Israel Attacks Syria?... Ho Hum.

September 9th, 2007 WMD/Nuclear Program (background read)*

IAEA chastises U.S., Israel over Syrian reactorLack of information sharing, unilateral attack anger nuclear watchdog-

"The director general deplores the fact that this information was not provided to the agency in a timely manner, in accordance with the agency's responsibilities under the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, to enable it to verify its veracity and establish the facts," the statement said.

Additionally, "the director general views the unilateral use of force by Israel as undermining the due process of verification that is at the heart of the nonproliferation regime," it said.

-

A senior diplomat linked to the IAEA said ElBaradei had already let his displeasure be known to Rood during the U.S. official's phone call over the delay between the time the information became available to the United States and when he was informed of it.

* I did read the background material and the link where I institute a new policy of noting in bold the links I have read, in contrast to those that I just visually or figuratively, cherry picked a reading from. In this case I have block quoted and will [bracket] in comments later. (square brackets indicate editing or additions) And as far as labels go, below, I will use them as categories or additional hints of commentary pun (Ex. Expelled) which in reality... Re: cycle in particular Hint: exemplified here

WWOS

"What would Olbermann say?" Thank you, Stephanie Miller.
"Tone matters", thank you Vice President Biden.
Influencing it...priceless.
Not to be ironic...
Thank you Steve Weber for the "introspection"
and "reflect(ing) the difference" Mitch Bard and the "globalgrind" of Russell Simmons not to mention coco who? And even David Schuster and back to Steph...anopolis*.
[Note: Bookending Bold Read. Meaning I may have only glanced at some the rest but will update the font later.]
* I'll let the spelling stand(although the name is Stephanopoulos) in a nod to the poison Ivy of the FOX league.

"One Can...

Reasonably Hope".
(Henceforth, bold links will be fully read.)
[update Point Counter-Point:

The White House vehemently denies that there is any change in policy. "The president has been crystal clear that we will begin drawing down troops in July of 2011. There is absolutely no change to that policy," said Tommy Vietor, a White House spokesman.(This quote appears in both McClatchy sources

Parsing Focus or Focus Combat:
My point is that the two articles, before I read them, seemed to indicate a proper balance. Unbeknownst to me the McClatchy was even updated but I have now read the original McClatchy (Point-above) it was based on, as well as the other two (Counter-Point) and find my original embedded feeling that it was a good transition balance from military to political focus. This is a multidimensional* refocus, which even Rand Paul has played a reasonable part in. The focus is not so much on July 2011, but ultimate success**, and the aim to bring the discussion from military to political focus. Must we be reminded that while Congress does have the powers of the purse and war, the President is commander-in-chief and there is no real constitutional branch of diplomacy or foreign policy or Department of Peace.
* balance of powers within our nation and within other nations (from military to diplomacy)
** July 2011, Transition begins.
[Related Micro-Mess Aging. "the medium is the message" the Mess age is the medium?]

Building On Change

Obama cares about change, it was not necessarily his plan or our plan, but what congress thought we could get. But it is only a building block of change. This is a preemptive comment of sorts based on the facts in the leed, although now I am mid-read. Facts in other states are different, but the main point is the economic sense that "adverse selection*" costs someone. Here I have read it fully, though not necessarily able to relate it fully, the changes may also take adverse tracks. i.e. No mandate? Other more direct "interference ".
(italics not fully read)
* not buying insurance until you need to, and insurances required to sell it.
[Breaking Under the Radar or Flying over the Top? Basically preemptively , Republicans blame the government for the rising housing prices and the crash on not continuing support from government.]
[12-17-10 Obama cares(above bold added for original intent a pun)

Speaking of timing

Or counting (or FOX)and follow-up(I could swear there are 6 legs unless it is on the other hand*.)
{italics not fully read yet but it is the point of departure}
{the point of arrival is not always originally intended, or that is the question.}
{note on labels, Navigation is regarding the blog, Navigation II is regarding our course changes. Maybe I should add Navigation III(a combo?).}
(Oh, and a leed change is also a challenge...to read)
* Third Way is point of tangent
[Maybe Thom Hartmann(AM1090) is coming to a realization, which I just missed(taking a call) regarding the power of Obama and his base and secondary potential thread. My points here are: Obama's base is not the liberal left. The Right's loss is the Left's loss, but the middle's gain.(I just coined** that.) My original metaphor*** was, as Republicans lose voters, they become more concentrated, while as Democrats gain voters they are diluted. ]
** critics please pick a better word for this new paraphrase of my original concept, other than coined, is in not that it is not making money for me, but I am just not sure that you coin a phrase. "turned" may suffice.
*** actually a metaphor would have a concept like Lemonade or Kool-aid as an ingredient, which apparently I have previously avoided saying directly at least.
[Still needing to read the italics link, Thom Hartmann and callers are still frustrated, and discuss the Marxist concept that things have to fail first. I am uncertain that is technically a valid name for it, but my point is that dynamically it will not work that way on two counts. It would take people who want it to fail(whatever it is) and it would take people giving up on changing it. That is why peace is much harder work than war, and why it is much harder and slower to make progress than to see the same things again.]
[Post-Pre-emptive Comment: or rather footnote regarding bubbles and cliffs and easing the wall down. Post Hartmann comment: one of my tangents was inspired by the concept of not enough mentionalism, a pun on the dimension of perspectives and whether there are two parties, or three or four or whether the labels matter. But the more the merrier or at least the more the discussion and the bigger the table.]
[Post Building on Change update: "That is why peace is much harder work than war, and why it is much harder and slower to make progress than to see the same things again." Bold added above, but link back provided as promised here.]
[Just in...Breaking or rather Re-Creating the mold: and I am only up to the word "defecit" in Steve Clemons question but I am having a feeling it relates to my just bolded and repeated quote in last bracket, and to wrap this up before it is too diffuse I seems to build upon earlier comments if not leeds.]

Step two in bringing it home.

...
Olmert: Israel won’t negotiate with Hamas
Militant group quiet after landslide victory in Palestinian elections

U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said major mediating powers Thursday agreed Hamas should renounce violence.

"We reaffirmed the view that ... you can’t have one foot in terror and the other in politics," Rice told Reuters in an interview after senior officials from the so-called Quartet -- Russia, the United Nations, the European Union and the United States -- spoke by phone.

...

"A two-state solution to the conflict requires all participants in the democratic process to renounce violence and terror, accept Israel’s right to exist, and disarm," the statement said.

...

NOTE:

Let's not read too much between the lines, the dots, or the paragraphs, but the bold I added and that punctuation could be a stretch. But that is only all the more room to work between the lines.

These brief comments are made without a thorough read of the last few links in this area. Not that any closer read would get any closer to a reality that needs more work and punctuation anyway, but I will try to get back to them unless things unfold too fast.

Chew On...

Or Eschew [*]... on This.
One might bite.
(Speaking of class or was it paradigms?)
[Ribble in a Tea Pot?]
[BTW: I am crafting a reply to the ribble or paradigm. It bites...a thought "divided against itself"?]

[*] update 11-22-10 bold italics update bold indicates I have finally read fully but italics not a recommend [P.S. asterisk is post everthing above]

Meta PI

Meta Preemptive Inclinations:**

1.Tea Party shocker: Even right-wingers become liberals when they turn off Fox News
2. The Thought Catalog revolution: How trolling took over the Internet
3. Libertarians are very confused about capitalism
More to read links from Salon.
GOP’s intolerance trap: How ENDA fight explains all of U.S. politics
Paul Krugman on America’s “mutilated” economy (a)*
Albert Camus anticipated the Arab Spring
Michigan mayor: We’re not under Shariah law!
Must-see morning clip: Patrick Stewart slams Rand Paul and others as comedians with “bad script writers”
Salon exclusive: More Rand Paul plagiarism

*bold indicative of order read

[Where is the department of that?]
Veterans Day is a prayer for peace

[NOW with Alex Wagner GOP/Grand Old Problem/Deal With It (Akin to three way chess)] .
**Mangled Pythagorean Interests (Force Fear Fancy Futures) 

"hair of the dog"

Alan Shrugged
by Marty Kaplan The Huffington Post

Slang for Morning Joe** or not* your cup of tea. OK, I mixed metaphors or drinks, implying a wake-up. Actually I may have something here, as the bailout, or rescue has not yet reached a full intervention, and will it?

*On a lark I looked up Morning Read which you need not, nor dig up Slang Note: bold link is the read for the day.
** I don't catch the show but would recommend Rachel Maddow getting another 2 hours.

[Evening update: the way this comment weaves I might refer to the navigation link. Meanwhile another link: I need to unembed or consider the table.
In particular:
a list of economists I had intended to sort as progressives, Noted in the article - Joseph Stiglitz, Dean Baker, Jared Bernstein. Not noted - Paul Krugman, Ravi Batra: Meanwhile: Kudos to Krugman. Speaking of Laffer and Elixirs ]

More From the Other Washington

Governor Locke selected for Secretary of Commerce Baltimore Sun Tribune

Previously Sims selected Deputy Secretary of HUD
Northwest Progressive Institute
Not to mention: Seattle Police Chief Kerlikowske for Drug Czar

Speaking of Housing:
Housing Price Decline Accelerates
by Dean Baker Center for Economic and Policy Research
and Selections:E-Voting Security Fixes...
by John Turner ARS Technica
and other Similarities:
San Francisco Chronicle May Shut Down
by: Robert MacMillan and Janet Kornblum, Reuters
Seattle Post-Intelligencer to go Web only…or be shut down by Classified Intelligence?

And President Obama Getting Warmer by Robert Scheer Truthdig (Un-State of the Union)
Or Cooler? Freeing Up Resources...for More War by: Norman Solomon, t r u t h o u t | Perspective

Or Unbounded? Beyond Scarcity: Reinventing Wealth in a Progressive World
by: Joe Brewer, t r u t h o u t | Perspective *

[This sampling is not fully read yet (nfry) but forms a web of sorts with orginal sources in italics for the prior link. ]

* The pieces from Cognitive Policy Works .[Kerbel/Brewer]. in Previous Post of sorts have been read and are recommended as bold updated reflects [also .Lakoff. ].