Filed under: — @jphoganorg @ 6:51 am

And you thought you were safe.

You didn’t even consider it.

You didn’t even realize they had quietly secreted it all away from you.

You now may wake on this 2010 Fourth of July to a very different country.  A country no longer of concern, democratic, but for now just the "one blogger", "one voter", and also only "one dissident"? 

President Barack Obama (BO) "citizen of the world" so eloquently prefaced to so new "limited" from Berlin, and so there so openly with a telling to becoming only concerned with "one dissident" "the blogger in Iran" and "the voter in Zimbabwe" and as well just the words "never again." 

You may wake to a First Amendment no longer a law protecting free speech.

Ha! Ha! Ha!  Our preamble to our Constitution as "not law" would make our entire Constitution that follows also "not law".  What were/are they thinking?  In Senator Obama’s "I am not here as a candidate for President" Berlin speech orated "in order to form a more perfect union" so goes our rights with his editing it away from "in Order to form a more perfect Union."

It can only be read as an ordaining of their creation of theory and in its grammar, with braggadocio, of a new union as a Union now superior and originally so than any other written/writable ordaining yet to date in the history of government, right?

It cannot be read as "not law" to > what follows is knowingly imperfect and hardly worth the paper it is written on nor all the hard work to its Order > "in order to form a more perfect union" interpretation that it wasn’t really law after all and that American would just have to make it up as they went along, right?

It (our preamble)has to be law and the legend and key to the entire Constitution that follows and fits in following within the full scope and emphasis of our preamble as written and grammaritized oddly with specific and specifically unexpected (for its time) capitalizations as "ordered" in Order, right?

I don’t recall if I publicly graded Obama’s Berlin Speech or if so if it got an "incomplete" but I do remember giving his Cairo Speech an "F" and hardly for it in the "presumptuous" of "to all Muslims" as a man born a Muslim now of chosen faith in Christianity.  He seemed to certainly, and for his political convenience, deny that our American Civil War ever existed, and existed as tens of thousands of white citizens, and even Buffalo Soldiers dying for greater freedoms for blacks.  He seemed to declare that American slaves got out of their bondage "peacefully and without violence" and as instructive so for all Muslims so spoken to.

(Wow, I am keeping this far more positive than I felt at all possible considering how I am feeling about much to all of this.)

Well, we should have our Supreme Court reverse its recent decision around free speech and our First Amendment as decided in agreement with Elena Kagan arguements.  We, necessarily should see the reversal of such and a non-confirming of E. Kagan and maybe by our Fourth of July, 2010. 

Judge for yourself around the implication in just this one quote:

"The event that cut the ground from under Khalad Hassan’s feet, and which then created the opportunity for Arafat by degrees to impose his will and way on Fatah’s Central Committee, was the founding of the Palestine Liberation Organization under the leadership of Ahmad Shuqairi. Nassar was the chief architect of the original P.L.O.  He intended it to be his puppet.  But its real godfather was the American State Department which, at the time, was under the direction of Dean Rusk."


Oh, and Yasser Arafat is storied/biographed as well in this ARAFAT, TERRORIST OR PEACEMAKER? "authorized biography by noted English journalist Alan Hart as also having consulted a Catholic Priest for moral establishment, the Father Iyad of: "Father, all I need from you is your blessing." and "And I gave it to him."  "It was the first but not the last time that Arafat turned to Father Iyad for moral support." (Such as storied in ARAFAT, TERRORIST OR PEACEMAKER" around setting in chapter "THE DECISION TO FIGHT" with:  "It was in that troubled state of mind that Arafat, accompanied by Wazir, travelled from Kuwait to a convent in Beirut for a talk with a very special Palestinian - Father Iyad.")

Well, should be an interesting week now what with it so nearer our Fourth of July and of trial/confirmation hearing of Kagan, Elena, Supreme Court nominee. 

These are the times trying men and women souls and of a necessary war of words to undo what Kagan wrought?  America, terrorist or peacemaker? Madam Kagan?  America, spreader of freedom and rights, or enforcer of socialism as a few now command? Madam Kagan?

Our preamble has to be "law" for so Ordered and ordained by its signing a Union was formed more perfect than any other ever before it, and, of course that if it is not law than what follows cannot be law, as if prefaced to "a more perfect union" instead -then what follows a pro forma mess not worth the paper it was signed and ordained upon.

Yes, "We the People, in Order to form a more perfect Union,establish Justice,…"  does suddenly drop from braggadocio of "Order…more perfect Union" to reality of Justice as a human condition needing constant working and attempting towards "Establish" with "establish Justice" to the practice of the newly and so ordained new Order in such so consecrated Union.

Oh, anyone:  "I am not here as a candidate for President, but as a citizen… and a fellow citizen of the world."? 

But a Union so not yet an Order ordained, right? 

Best to stick with our own Constitution and speak only as President of our United States of America and not as "heirs" to his father’s socialist dreams?  

And you thought you were safe?

And, you didn’t even consider it, yet?

But then maybe Elena Kagan for such recent arguing, is a godsend as such a decision may pave the way to a prosecution of both Hillary Rodam and William Jefferson Clinton for "terrorist support" speech at least?  Maybe those "campaign" moments where she hinted to "executive power" willingness (to be like Rusk) to belittle Senator Obama for not being ready or willing to make the ‘tough decisions"?  Maybe there was more to Senator Clinton even sounding like she was speaking to a "sleeper cell" with like "it is time for a wake up call"?  Maybe what with "Bill and Hillary" having tried to hold onto their "executive powers" post their presidency, and not as cleverly as they thought, such does pave way for judging Clintons around having highjacked presidential powers and around "terrorist support" and such that they forced President Bush’s hand even or especially around more basic freedom and rights spreading as effected basically by "standing with" in Iraq?

Most morally troubling would be that with such a prosecution of Clintons now with way better paved for President Obama with such recent ruling is quite that decisions made by Clinton "two-fer" monolith may have sold out American soldiers lives as "Bill’s admin best kept without this, and with avoidance and inaction, so that it could be "Hillary’s Rusk moments" years later after their avoidance and inaction maybe just to set a selfish stage made region and situations worse and more dangerous?

Have the Clintons been together in effecting "executive power" while not our "executive" and are they now prosecutable and for getting caught doing such without having regained the "executive power" protection, thought once secure?