Filed under: — @jphoganorg @ 5:11 pm

Do Clintons wish now that they had an "out" as Tea Partiers?  Are they now fraught and doomed?  Are they anarchists?

Terrorism, muy mal! Terrorists, very bad too!

Clintons failed to fight tyranny when positioned and called upon decades of American legal and post world war reconstruction precedence?

Are they anarchists to boot?

Surely Secretary Hillary Clinton’s insubordination now rates as also a dismissable infraction; Surely Secretary Hillary Clinton’s first moves as Secretary of State, with a compromised position as wife of founder and operator of Clinton Global Foundation and Presidential Library, and, a term limited President of still meddling beyond existing precedence for past presidents, measure now for her audacity then now as "dismissable" rating.

What are you going to do when he comes for you? Now?

Tyranny bad, very bad!  Terrorists also muy mal!

And so too clever Danteist of Dante Infernoisms "Hillary" now with the General bell also tolling for her?  Insubordination repeated recently with the Equador interview forcing President Obama’s hand on Arizona?  Too clever a Secretary of State starting her reign with her ngo’d Ambassador to the World "Bill" trying to do right by their "two-fer" selfish goals and ambitions, and with ends justifying their means towards first married couple both elected to our presidency, now fraught naught?

Is it "terrorist supporting" orationing or just to anarchy those early comments by Secretary Hillary Clinton trying to live a false illusion of Obama won and then made a deal to let Clintons have the world if he could be left alone domestically to govern our United States of America without their interference?

SCOTUS AND POTUS has the Clintons’ general bell been also rung "general insubordination" and "poor judgement"?

SCOTUS: Does your new ruling on "terrorist support" speech have application to the Clintons and maybe to their having worked to set up "walls of separation" at our FBI between enforcement and intelligence, prior to 9/11?

POTUS:  What else can we make of "Hillary" though maybe just suffering "slings and arrows" of near greatest defeat in American political campaign history so stuck by you basically as a small bureaucrat in just another travel and travel document department?

POTUS:  What else can now be made post General McChrystal pulling a "Clinton" but not quit as serious as when our Secretary of State, maybe just in denial, did say publicly she would be like taking her orders and leadership inspiration not from you but from that high power Dante wrote around with his Inferno?

Terrorism, muy mal!  Have you tried poetry slams?


Filed under: — @jphoganorg @ 10:05 am

Is it time anew for John Millington Synge?

Is it anew an era for William Butler Yeats?

How now but for Maude Gonne? 

Am I really better looking than Prince Albert of Monaco, son of Princess Grace?

Puff Diddy?  Puff Daddy?

Paul Giamatti as Adams?

Where is Dagny Taggart?

Where is Gail Wynand?  Dominique?

I am at least better looking than Paul Giamatti and near so of Prince Albert of Monaco?

Paul Giamatti as Adams?   You were better looking in first grade, old neighbor?

Hey SCOTUS:  If POTUS shifts to language and posture of POTUS BUSH with a return to "war on terror" and away from his "contingencies" towards imperialist neocolonialism so dating back to at least his early days in Manhattan as told by himself in his scribed DREAMS OF MY FATHER of "I picked my friends carefully…the Marxist professors…punk rock poets…neocolonialists" are you not then party to providing this POTUS a "gag" on media criticism of a sitting president?  Were there exceptions in your rulings and decidings that say would now condemn General McChrystal if President was of a "war on terror" instead of his imperialist neocolonial agenda postured?   Surely I will find when I find your full rulings around such, SCOTUS, that you addressed fully how any or some "criticism" of a president in a "war on terror" could be decided as "supporting terror"?

Ok, Paul, I am at least as good looking as you, too.

Are there protections for artists and poets?

Ignorance as bliss?

And, if when mail ordering a bride, without "knowing a priori"?