5/7/2010

COMPROMISED

Filed under: — @jphoganorg @ 5:54 am

No, I am not talking about "LT"!  He may be compromised but not as topically much as our country is today for "kid’s gloves" the "modus operandi" of "news coverage."

America, we got some problems, big problems.

Yes, this again is about Bill Clinton.

Yes, this again is of grave concern for our Country and its acquiesence to the "light hearted" modus operandi of Clintronics.

Someone isn’t doing their job in Washington.

I am not in Washington; I cannot help but be concerned that "someone" is actually a large grouping/class of Washingtonians.

How many people will suffer for the main stream media continuing to treat Secretary Clinton with "kid gloves"?  How many Republicans will now suffer? By treating Secretary Hillary Clinton with such "forgiveness" how many Republicans are not being "compared" now when such would present them in "better light"? And, now so to nation thinking Republicans must have something to hide? 

By acting so "soft" on Clintons is it "favoritism" or "affirmative action."  By not scrutinizing and with a calling for "head(s) to roll" the main stream media is presenting a "Republicans must have something to hide" story in their absense of coverage of Secretary Clinton.

Is this "compromised" of "affirmative action" even though we have already had two other female Secretary of State professionals and arguably with far less controversial modus operandi?

Is this still my greatest pet peeve of long scribed concern over not treating the Clintons as a "two-fer" of "One" legally and within the "spirit" and "soul" and prescribed meaning in passing a term limit Amendment like our 22nd? (Not all marriages are of equals as an indivisible team but our law allows for such to be a concern and rightly.) 

Is this now yet another "cautioned" from "danger" of not forbidding a spouse of a term limited president not only a run for more terms for their "two-fer" but allowed such stretching to even having them lingering around as within a new Cabinet?

We are all now "compromised" for Secretary Clinton again being treated with "kid gloves"!

By treating "Hillary" so softly it is now former Secretary Colin Powell and Secretary Condoleezza Rice who will pay in minds of American voters, and for of our main stream media not working it.

Even Sec. Warren Christopher and Sec. Madeleine Albright have their reputations at risk for this a current "soft shoe" on Clintons, maybe "affirmative action" for "working moms"/"female spouses"!

Is "Hillary" too big to fail?  Is that the problem?

Where is the "cat fight" that past administrations would have MSM throwing at them over either infighting or a great oddity in "infighting" not present?

(Speaking of "topically":  Are sun-screen sales surpassing summer sales/spring sales suspected seasonally so suspiciously soon so spirited so Arizona?)

Is "Hillary" too big to fail?  Can we discern from The White House also not lambasting Clinton(s) that they are more at fault now in security failures and economics and "dependent" on Clintons?  Where is the infighting?  How is "Michelle" not running "Hillary" down?  Could Secretary of State Hillary Clinton be making President Obama (Michelle’s man) look any worse?  Or is it: Could he look any better without her?

Well, the MSM is only working it "soft shoe" and "kid’s glove" and now Republicans will suffer for such unamerican activities of press weakness.

Is the Clintons’ (Bill’s?) usefulness as "already in bed with world leaders not democratically elected" and willingness to look the other way with "acceptance" of their "governance" too great a "contribution"/"power" in play in Obama’s White House? That was "Hillary’s" greatest selling point during campaigns, right?  It was that "Hillary" already knew everyone and wouldn’t have to refresh ties or worry about petty democratic opinions abroad? 

So "Bill and Hillary" even without being re-elected to a third term are now seeming of Bill as "Putin" and Hillary as "Medvedev" and President Obama as maybe just Russian underlings?

Are we all lowering our standards and our expectations by allowing such unamerican activities to proceed still daily with our dailies?  

Are our defenders of our "Fourth Estate" now "compromised" for extending such as ’courtesies’ to a former First Lady/First Couple as have long been expected as "tradition" and now even though one now of real post such duties?