Walking the Plank[!]

A caller to a talk show expressed well my sentiment on the death penalty.
Paraphrased: I will support the death penalty when the first corporation is executed in Texas. Well, being a Jolly Roger, (i.e. No Will Rogers) I might not go that far mattie.(ar R something privatization.)

[!]= sarcasm/irony punctuation (See lede 'r ship)

The real leadership is not in a party or a position but in ideas. My pun is purely about the platform over the process, not to mention parties. But in particular a few planks that Bernie Sanders has suggested in the form of: Six Demands to Make of Wall Street.
If Republicans want to walk the talk, of Where are the Jobs?* Then vote on every last one of these, as well as the American Jobs Act, and see who will be left on the ship of fools.

[Speaking of R's Bruce Bartlett anyone? (or A B Sea?)

* The American Jobs Act.

Speaking of three R's.
Four P's.
Five Minutes.
Six Demands.
Seven Lies.(2.5 minutes)
Too Cubed.
Three Three Squared.

The Big Dig

Ron Paul not so much.
Mitt Romney not so much.
Newt Gingrich, deeper.

Re-Group?

NOW, was that what I was talking about? Just teasing. Or "tough surrogate"?

Not having reviewed each of the links, nevertheless here are hints to my G'Ribble.
Under "Mitt Romney" there was a hint that the debate was "on a topic that he should dominate: the economy". Hence the "ledership" of The Big Dig? Investment in infrastructure anyone?

[Then there is the Laffer Curve of Regulation Job Growth. Which is my twist on not just the misuse of the curve, but the avoidance of* regulation. Regulation could be increasing jobs, if they were not avoiding the regulations.]

*the real laugher is in the "willing to report" and the needless "math genious".

[Coffee Party / Organizing Wall Street: De Calf anyone?]

Christie Endorses Romney.

FOX
CBS
MSNBC

I have yet to filter,
but a pre-emptive comment:
"Danger, Will Robinson!"

Buy Witch I mean: Romney/Christie[!]
Not that I might actually get around to reading the above takes, yet:

If it's a choice between a genuine Moderate, and a Moderate in Republican clothing, the people will choose the genuine article, every time; that is, they will take a Democrat before they will a phony Moderate**, and I don't want any phony Moderate candidates in this campaign. *

[Jammed to the Right?
See Matthews (Beating Mitt) and weaving moderate creds.]

*My spin on a Truman quote.
** corrected today

["who am I" to advise the GOP? BO see fuss?]

One Bad Apple

don't spoil the whole bunch!
People are not apples, and several data point are not a playing field [!]

See bold "bunch" for a crisp one.
[ Speaking of bad apples, not!]


ALMOST SATIRE!(see "bad")
[De-constructive social criticism using dull as a weapon. I feel fairly certain that OWS does not want to do away with corporations, or even that corporations are the target. All corporations are not evil, they are amoral. Corporations are not the real bogeyman, Wall Street and regulations aren't either. They are what need to be addressed in a balanced way.]
[Not exactly oranges.]

Never the Twain

shall meet ***.

This is about the message* getting through the mess age.

Maybe if Diane Sawyer had not blundered, MEDIAite may not have covered her take on OWS.

* Obama gets it, Cain? Not so much. Lind? Too much. Sirota? So?**

** who said "so?" Cheney to polls. Lawrence O'Donnell, or Chris Matthews to Obama.

*** meet is key link(see 1% analysis).
[also see shall, speaking of headings]

Spoiler Alert!

Not Really[!]

Four words could not do more for context and con tent. Ron Paul is doing for the Republicans, what Obama can't do for the country. Ron Paul winning over "Values Voters" is almost a sign of some "reality"*, if not unity. The Obama strategy is more "real" in the context of divided goverment. i.e. branches not parties (not to mention the pinnacle of the tetrahedron)

* or some "sense"

Network Paradox-

ymoron.

AlanGrayson nails it.
Well, not exactly.

One party "Occupies Wall Street[!]"(OWS), the other is "Fair and Balanced".

Mad as HBO and not going to take it?

[My "parodoxymoron" is not aimed at a person, but the perspectivism of parties, and anti-relativism. My use refers to my one liner of contrast. My apologies to the WWW, I thought I coined something.]

I HEART OWS!

I HEART Occupy Wall Street

I HEART OWS!
Sounds like a bandage commercial.
I'm not sure it would be a good button in the face of a badge,
nor poster that a badge might take for his motto.

DECLARATION OF THE OCCUPATION!
Press Conference Obama
Lessig/Dylan
Pre-#OWS!

[10-7-11 Hiatus: John Kay, Ha-Joon Chang, I Heart JOBS!, The Toss?, The Gipper, The Dream, The Gate, The M?. Calm Pend I um. Not to be cryptic, but...delta dawn, what's that ...]
[#OWS: Apples and Oranges?]

I'm a PC.

Not to be PC,
but a Jobs loss is everybody's loss.

Not to compare apples and oranges,
but to be Buddhist and Billionaire?
Not to pun completely or cherry pick,
I mean pop culture.




[I guess it is in reaction to someone* who used the death of Steve Jobs to demean those who occupy wallstreet, I take a different path. Not to give a RIP in vain.]

* that someone is not linked on this post, but they used the Slate link under "pop culture".

Throwing the Game

or Tetrahedron.

Or should we call it die with less perspective?

Bottom line? I mean, who am I to advise the GOP, but the Pizza Guy may just be the best thing for the country. Not that I would go that far, but if he makes it to nominee, I mean, it just might be good for the national debate. At least he will have one up on the MBA president, if not the constitutional law and community organizer president. I mean just what business is the country in? Let alone what it means to grow the pie.

The other lines? Well I will work on them later, but there may be something to Jon Stewart's point, if not baiting photobombers. I don't want to run the table, but I guess that is another table.


[Post-Ribble or Meta-4: the above was written without the benefit of having followed much ofor many of the links. It was based simply on the point that we have an executive of Godfather's Pizza running for president, and it might be good for the debate. That and the pun on dice(plural) or the lesser perspectives/dimentions of the tetrahedron. But I will now add that I will also contrast in a less dimensional way, Andrew Breitbart and Jon Stewart, they only hinge on the 1st amendment. In that regard I clicked on a link at the latter's and note the "freedom of speech" and the rest of I.T.

Bocephus had a point, even though he was wrong about almost everything else. There is something strange, to say the least about Boehner and Obama playing golf, while some fiddle.

What are the odds? (I can't find where I buried the original ref: but I guess that means that Netanyahu not only might have played golf with Hitler, but he would pin a badge on him. I guess that leaves me off the Picard(cunnard) upon which Brietbart has hoisted himself.) It is not uncommon for me to lose links, but what are the odds the last thing in my email is on Cain.]

[10-6-11 update: Hank Williams Jr.-No Dylan - I agree with Hank Williams Jr. in his apology "The thought of the Leaders of both Parties Jukin and High Fiven on a Golf course, while so many Families are Struggling to get by simply made me Boil over and make a Dumb statement and I am very Sorry if it Offended anyone. I would like to Thank all my supporters. This was Not written by some Publicist." But I beg to differ on the move to get money out of politics. [The devil is in the details, and what is left out. I think the petition is flawed. While I support the intent and wish it well, what will it be replaced with? What influence will the media then have in filtering the debate? What influence will corporations then have in crafting any messages? Get money out of the news! Get money out of "free speech"! If you catch my drift.] HW Jr. used a disgusting analogy, but Dylan Ratigan's petition just falls short of being comprehensive.]
[If wishes were fishes...we'd be fed up. Bain or cut bait, and candy and nuts.]

What, Me Worry?

No, I am not talking MAD[!].
I am talking math.
And so is Ronald Reagan!

Like the "golden rule" the "Buffet Rule" (not to mention American Exceptionalism) has two connotations.

[Speaking of Mad, here is a slippery slope. A combination of the fallacy of the false dilemma and the boogie man, not to mention divide to conquer. In the last dichotomy, it is the egalitarian from the rest of our founding principles and perspectives*.]

* I preemptively insert as a counter-balance: To be read and transmobilized later. Or should I say, trance figured. But it depends(see post asterisks) on what your definitions of I T R.
[10-5-11 Maybe I should.]
[Duoh!]

[10-6-11 Speaking of trans something.]

Take Back the American Dream

The 99%?
Jobs not cuts!
Occupy K-Street etc.
Big Tent Technical Difficulties.**

[Are we ready for some football?] [!]***

[continued 10-4]I feel like I have broken something in recent days. Maybe my perspective. Maybe I need to change fields. The above lede is an example. Maybe I don't feel like occupying anything. I am encouraged by the generation of interest and a movement of the people. Maybe nailing down what that is is the problem. Someone from one of the groups at the conference expressed concern that they not be co-opted by unions or the Obama campaign. That seemed an interesting perspective, as if they are on the same page. And my* teaching to the test may be a root of the problem. Jon Stewart covers the "Occupy Wallstreet" scene, but after the break deals with the NRA and their "conspiracy" theories.

[Segue: I will break and post be4 I muck up more.]
Back from a tangent:
I will simply foot note.
(Thanks to the Thom Hartmann Chat)

* see the 10-3 Just to be clear... & its asterisk(1)
** This was originally the extent of my draft, normally I might insert some loose tangential links, but I am continuing on 10-4. Maybe I wanted to be point blank, or not follow things to a T. And maybe I have done just enough to change that course.
*** last insert

[Sorry for the anachronistic asterisks, but4 original-I-T[!] Not really...neither of these may the T-rigor for my thoughts. However under "these" lies a similar transmobrificationlation:

Back in 1787 when the Constitution was being worked out, conservatives pointed out that what John Adams called "the rabble" couldn't be trusted to elect representatives or - even more dangerously - become elected officials. As the father of modern conservative thought, Edmund Burke (1729-1797), famously noted: "The occupation of a hair-dresser, or of a tallowman [candle maker], cannot be a matter of honor to any person - to say nothing of a number of other more servile employments. Such description of men ought not to suffer oppression from the state, but the state suffers oppression if such as they, either individually or collectively, are permitted to rule."]

Retro-Gate

Iran-Contra, WMD, October No-Surprise.

Not to preemptively prophet[!]
Not to bring back the draft,
but here are some posts held in draft.

Update: Muffin Gate: Miff In Gate


Pulled from draft today!
[Oops, a bit redundant]
Great Ledership
It's Mad[!]

[!] = sarcasm / spelling as intended = [sp!]
Close enough for journal work?

[10-3-11 Just to be clear, I believe in nuance and the law, but as different fields. What I can't say is that I am clearly satire, but the field might be mis-ledership***. But not to coin a new field, here are some other* perspectives, not to say they are the same field. (two video, two scroll overs)

*after the break: Stewart on NRA / teaching** to the test? NOT!]
** speaking of headings*** or retro
*** footnote to clarify later:
moral economics(INET/Robert Reich)& even later
BTW: sub-heading(Just to be clear...) I did not mean to wind-up a G'Ribble, but you can't judge a target by its aim, fear-mongers need a boogie-man. Aims are directions not bulls-eyes.

Definition: G'Ribble- grand ribbing and riddle

[*4] Ratigan and Perugia: processes

It's MAD[!]

To be clear, that is actually what I heard, the day the President put on his game face last week. To be clear, it was not his solutions that are Mutually Assured Destruction, but the "class warfare"(Math) that has been taking place for 30 years or more.

From draft as-is 10-2-11

Muffin-Gate

[MIFF IN GATE?]

Fire the Filter.
Heads should roll over 2 cents.

Bill O'Reilly: "so we should shoot them".
[Caution: This is not True Ledership, but spelling intended.]

True ledership, would put the fired up rhetoric as the headline. Nor is it true journalism, except for the 2 cents.

Speaking of firing the filter, google might be the problem. Of course it is "hard work" getting words just right, and here is another exception to the rule, or what I was so fired up about. FOX10TV.com actually had an update that did headline the correction.

[I won't call it inconvenient or truth, but the so-called journalistic links are in bold, while the roll and the filter are ingredients of more than just rhetoric. Speaking of brown-and-serve or oven or shovel ready.]

[UPDATE: 10-12-11 The bored game.]

American Exceptionalism

The lighter side.

The darker side.

Sea-side or C-side. "swimming against the current"? Not to take sides, but "American Exceptionalism" is about what is different about America. See bold side and "The" first link. For some it is about being better, not just different. A new form of patriotism. But is it really different than any other nation's patriotism, or "better than others" feelings? I think it is too much to get caught up in the term. But by focusing on what is different, how we were founded, it is true that no nation can find the grounds to plant new ideas, quite like we did. Not that they(ours) were all smooth transitions, these days they can be even more troublesome*. And there is a difference between what Obama can represent in American Exceptionalism by trying to spread our ideas around the world, and the way old regimes hang on or try to spread theirs.

*found link as after search:
original "troublesome" was international not domestic
The Wall Street Journal is not American** nor exceptional jouralism, but a class warrior against the American dream. (entitlements, taxes, free trade)
**not naturally born

[Try-ing, Try-ing***, Trying]

*** Bolton, no Twain
Obama, no Mark
or vice verse US:
The High Way or the My Way.
[links are not necessarily coordinated here]

Great Ledership

Not blame game.
[Lede reads: Biden Blame Obama White House, Not Bush]

From Draft As Is 10-2-11

Un-Exceptionalism

Are there conflicts of interest in economics today?

Undoubtedly[!]
Buy definition and nature.

This may take us back to my Try-UNism, and one, none or all of punderous pondering.
[Mid-post tangent and update.]

No Twain in Try-ing. Well, I did not mean to display un-exceptionalism by example, as in "there he goes again." But my original point was that conflicts of interest are what economics and politics and government are all about. There, is that clear enough?

The "Try-UNism" is a pun in this regard. A sorting of one, none or all. Now, technically the physics might be beyond anyone to say if freedom is a force, and psychologically it may be closer to philosophy for some. But economically, I am saying that without an intent, we will be getting only where we are going, and even that is not a won way street.

My apologies for any missed links or leaps(in your scroll or click-on), but it is an ongoing process. Economics contains and is about conflicts of interest, and politics and government, play crucial rolls for (sum) people.

In regards to my lede, Un-Exceptionalism, I take it from one of the economists, who notes that any field will present conflicts of interest between the professional and the profession or the field if it has a purpose other than the individual. Well, he did not go that far, but I think he could. The "one, none or all" of my tangent relates to Exceptionalism, as it is seen, possibly in that light.

BTW: The first three links are an economic series of videos. Other links may require clicking on and scrolling the link address for a compendium of purpose. For example, "Buy definition and nature". The first two simply reference the ledes. The "be-all-and-end-all" a reference from part 3 of series. The "funny-thing-happened" is a recap of the CW. And regarding "nature" the address is a search of my blog for "Adam+Smith"(without, now with the quotation marks). Skipping over the "Try-UNism" and "Mid-post tangent"(lines) the Twain is deeply embedded in Trying.
[Speaking of exceptions(won): just to be sure.]

[Insert more Ed here and here: enthusiasm gap]

Total Recall?

Not to pun on the Republican governors, but I must recall that Rachel Maddow has won an Emmy and Ed Schultz takes on the Republican takeover of the Postal Service.
Yet I can't locate my references in regard to my recommending them as host on MSNBC.

["Peace is hard work."
So is math, and it's MAD!]*

[Speaking of Jobs Plan: It is on! ]

[Speaking of/or lines.]

* how ever
Norman Goldman
[Republican on business malfeasance since 2006 in regards to Postal Act. Insert The Ed Show. /-/ 9-29-11 now see bold "Insert".]

give them enough

Hope [!]

Nope !
Tabled it!




The Pragmati ? Or ism? Or i c?
WOW, speaking of Timing !

[Bottom Line? [**] Or plastic nets?[***] Not hearding cats? Or Wolverines*, Buckeyes or Badgers.]

* M is for Michigan not Madison(mis-think/typo)
Sorry for the hurding mascots metaphor and pun on hearing.

[**] [ 9-28-11 "Line" link adjusted: First link at "Hope" is another bottom line, but last line of "Line" link another. Why I avoid hurds: "the experience only makes me wish I’d done something more to deserve it." It is hard to hold one's line.

[***] link updated