The 1st thing that went wrong.

LOYALTY

Ties to GOP trumped skill on Iraq team
In rebuilding effort, loyalty to Bush administration was paramount

This is probably the most important piece of the failed course that will not change. It not only rules out opposing views but limits the number of available skilled staff for an administration with little faith in the government serving the people. Then it also penalizes even those in the same party with open minds that see things differently. It should be no wonder that failure is so frequent and change is so difficult. Even those with merit that chose to keep giving their input will have no effect without the administration being willing to change and risk further exposure of their failures.

As George Lakoff, points out in the book, Don't think of an Elephant Know your values, Frame the debate there are a pair of parental metaphors Strict Father vs. Nurturing Parent and I earlier joked it was about the "Golden Rule", or rather the rule vs. the joke,(Those with...etc.). However there is a much simpler and more familiar way of putting it that explains the philosophy which is behind this all. "Do as I say, not as I do." Sadly the reaction to the reality that is in the results is also familiar to the strict father metaphor. "I'll give you something to cry about."


A second point, (not necessarily in order in the article)and I have not read beyond a few words in a few paragraphs, is probably the goal of privatization of government. It sounds good, but in reality it is a double edged sword that is not even half good. The two sides are either, you are on your own, and corporations will take care of what matters. It should simply be remembered that "privatization" is really "corporatization". Not that corporations are a bad thing, only that too much freedom is as much a concern for corporations as to individuals, for none of us would fair well on our own, even the ones that are trickling down.

[I will try to add links to my earlier references.]

In the begining...

was the math.  It was not good or evil.  But as his story has it, it was the word good, minus an oh.  But my ge oh me try, pertains to more recent Dawnings and Odysseys ... and our stories.    Not to mention whose father's a mother, and the ChrisT of Chris(noT) and Christ of her and Try-Unism not mention ChrisTmass.

Alter'nate

(12-19-11 cont.)
(Efin language caution.)
i.e. Way overboard.**

The Tetra Heed Run and voo doo* [!]

* original wording: "and back again"
** ef fort or ef-troop
(If you are sensitive to fowl depictions, not to kill two birds...)
BTW C-Scroll [!]

Footnotes:
Iron
Knee
Con
Text
Try-Unism

Not to undermine whatever academics*** there R here,
but a spin of a thought of the boogie man found me this, and relevant cycles referred to in the punctuation of irony/sarcasm which is [!].

*** that's academic [?] [See Comments for serious footnotes.]

Context:
Mission Accomplished
"Reel Ledership" (sic)
Bottom line
The Tetra Heed Run (sic)
(sic) is for spelling sake.(no[!]t)
The last link is a bit weak on the economic reference to the "free market": as if it exists.  Not that the tangents are not relevant, or what can be spun by mis-leding words, BTW.

P.S.  as I sent this out, I titled an E-mail Narrative-ity.
[And I might note that I am not using "strict" framing ala Lakoff, but walking a plank of nurture.
No president is the Messiah, maybe the Mess I uh, but Obama is the un-messWe-in.]

P.P.S. No Idol Thoughts.
[Link added 12-20-11]

< previous post >

Rat Races Van Mices?

Re: Barberization^ ?


Dequilting Platonics ... ? or DecomPart Meantalizing* Plato?  (Related reading problematics**).

* two unread reviews of a "have read".
** un-quilted 
reboot:quil  un-**ted (Not to disparage Sandel ...Slash Segue... but to weave or needle the*** dilemma.)
*** HayesTact (Bonus Straw ? ) O - W


^ Credit: streamica for the following side-bar there.
The Man versus The State (Forward) by Herbert Spencer
views: 1640
@LibertyInOurTime 1485 days ago

Audio presentation of Herbert Spencer's classic 1884 book 'The Man versus The State.' Read and produced by Jock Coats and made available online by the Ludwig von Mises Institute. Herbert Spencer lived long enough to witness both the hey-day of classical liberal reform in the mid-nineteenth century—the repeal of the Corn Laws in 1846 which ushered in a period of virtual free trade in Britain—and the gradual decline of classical liberalism towards the end of the nineteenth century. It is the latter which helps explain the grumpiness expressed in his later writings such as the collection of essays entitled Facts and Comments (1902). Spencer was born in Derby, England in 1820 to a strict, non-conformist family, and died in 1903. As a young man, Spencer worked for the leading free trade journal of the day, The Economist, from 1848-1853 during which time his first significant book appeared—Social Statics (1850). Here he worked with James Wilson, one of the most consistent advocates of laissez-faire in Britain, Nassau Senior, one of the leading members of the classical school of political economy, and Thomas Hodgskin, a radical individualist author. Much of the rest of his life was spent working on an all-encompassing theory of human development based upon the ideas of individualism, utilitarian moral theory, social and biological evolution, limited government, and laissez-faire economics. In his later writings, most notably The Principles of Sociology (1876-1896), he drew a sharp distinction between the peaceful productivity of free market societies ("the industrial type of society") and the social conflict, political privilege, and proclivity to war and empire inherent in societies with "over-legislation" ("the militant type of society"). In The Man Versus The State (1884) Spencer argued that the politics of vested interests and the increasing demand for economic regulation would lead to a new form of "slavery" and a "rebarbarization" of society. The rise of pro-interventionist "New Liberalism" in the 1880s and 1890s and the outbreak of the Boer War in 1899 confirmed his worst fears. (Source: Liberty Fund, Inc.) Read 'The Man versus The State' online: http://www.econlib.org/library/LFBooks/Spencer/spnMvS.htmlLinks

links to more online books and essays by Herbert Spencer: The Right to Ignore the Statehttp://mises.org/daily/2624The Reality of Political Momentumhttp://mises.org/daily/4772Education: Intellectual, Moral, and Physicalhttp://mises.org/resources/4968From Freedom to Bondagehttp://oll.libertyfund.org/?option=com_staticxt&staticfile=show.php%3Ftitle=313 The Principles of Ethics, Volume 1http://oll.libertyfund.org/index.php?option=com_staticxt&staticfile=show.php%3Ftitle=333The Principles of Ethics, Volume 2http://oll.libertyfund.org/index.php?option=com_staticxt&staticfile=show.php%3Ftitle=334Political Institutions, being Part V of the Principles of Sociologyhttp://oll.libertyfund.org/index.php?option=com_staticxt&staticfile=show.php%3Ftitle=1336Justice: Being Part IV of the Principles of Ethicshttp://oll.libertyfund.org/index.php?option=com_staticxt&staticfile=show.php%3Ftitle=1100Essays: Scientific, Political and Speculative, Vol. 1http://oll.libertyfund.org/index.php?option=com_staticxt&staticfile=show.php%3Ftitle=335Essays: Scientific, Political and Speculative, Vol. 2http://oll.libertyfund.org/index.php?option=com_staticxt&staticfile=show.php%3Ftitle=336Essays: Scientific, Political, and Speculative, Vol. 3http://oll.libertyfund.org/index.php?option=com_staticxt&staticfile=show.php%3Ftitle=337Essays on Education and Kindred Subjectshttp://oll.libertyfund.org/index.php?option=com_staticxt&staticfile=show.php%3Ftitle=2249The Study of Sociologyhttp://oll.libertyfund.org/index.php?option=com_staticxt&staticfile=show.php%3Ftitle=1335Social Staticshttp://oll.libertyfund.org/index.php?option=com_staticxt&staticfile=show.php%3Ftitle=273The Principles of Psychologyhttp://oll.libertyfund.org/index.php?option=com_staticxt&staticfile=show.php%3Ftitle=1394The Data of Ethicshttp://oll.libertyfund.org/index.php?option=com_staticxt&staticfile=show.php%3Ftitle=331First Principleshttp://oll.libertyfund.org/index.php?option=com_staticxt&staticfile=show.php%3Ftitle=1390Links to essays about Herbert Spencer and his works: Herbert Spencer: Libertarian Prophet by Roderick T. Longhttp://praxeology.net/herbertspencerlibertarianprophet.pdfHerbert Spencer: The Defamation Continues by Roderick T. Longhttp://www.lewrockwell.com/orig3/long3.htmlHerbert Spencer: Social Darwinist or Libertarian Prophet? by Peter Richardshttp://mises.org/daily/4779From Spencer's 1884 to Orwell's 1984 by Henry Hazlitthttp://mises.org/daily/2680The Development of Herbert Spencer's Concept of Evolution by Robert M. Younghttp://www.human-nature.com/rmyoung/papers/spencer.html

FYI: I have a collection of Herber Spencer's Books, having only read First Principles.  

Update: 2-22-14  Images C-Labels /T

 

 

 

GPS- general practice syndrome?

Original Intent?

Strict Constructionists?

Life begins at conception, what about right to privacy.
Yes? No?

Are either of these in the constitution? No.
But they both fall under the 9th and 10th Amendments.

Ninth Amendment - Unenumerated Rights

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

Tenth Amendment - Reserved Powers

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Now this does nothing to make things any easier, except to prove that it is not as simple as those that have the answers think it is. Also that even their positions cannot be sustained without complicated gyrations, usually known as hypocrisy, that would be contrary to the "rights retained by the people" which are protected by powers reserved "to the people". This would stand orginal intent on it's head, while even the power of the people need to be checked.

See the link?

The People's Business?

Bush today: “Sometimes politics gets in the way of the people's business.” Speaking of “on the one hand” or “on the other hand”, I was torn between thinking of it as the nadir or zenith, but it seems the core of his logic.

He wants his nominee and he wants it now.

So much for "strict father", sounds like pre-tantrum baby.

Further comment would have to rely on the “cause and effect” of whatever he means. And which comes first? People or business. Not to mention whatever the alternative to politics is. This seems the epitome or Dao(Dow) of cutting through and being full of it.

I could have done without a link, but there is possilby some link to the question of which comes first.

The Moment of Truth! How ironic, that it is time to lay the cards on the table.
HAVE COURAGE, RESPECT AND RESOLUTION FOR INSPECTIONS WORKING!

French foreign minister, Dominique de Villepin said: "It is difficult to imagine what could stop this machine" and adding "one does not have the right to be discouraged." (AP, King County Journal, 3-16-03, p. A9)
That is the major reason the Bush administration has for stopping the inspections, that the U. S. is discouraged. Dis-COURAGED and disrespecting the United Nations.

Please have courage and pass a resolution. Please declare the inspections are working and that the inspections will continue. Please agree on a strict timetable, that can be monitored and maintain control of the inspection process. If the U.S. is going to disrespect the U.N. by not having a resolution, someone must call them on it other than Saddam Hussein. If the U.S. is going to have war crimes trials, make sure they are signatures to the World Court or negotiate with Saddam Hussein directly rather that let the U.S. take the lead.