Filed under: — @jphoganorg @ 2:14 pm

Surely, even "Hillary" amounting to New York Senator also arguably political nepotism.

How can it be writ away other?  How can history not discuss and color how Senator Hillary Clinton was clearly attempting acquiring a Senate seat in a State that knew PRESIDENT CLINTON was moving to as the most powerful political figure in America, and not to tolerate any/many of posturing effected "RETIRED" status?  How can historians not question in the "but for" and "who you know" lay of such position acquiring and around knowledge that PRESIDENT CLINTON was to stay and stay around establishment of a new political machine around his "office as former president" and his GLOBAL foundation politicing?   How but to offer the "only because of…" and what with PRESIDENT CLINTON so to securing his own power in and around New York and of far more power than any one Senator should ever be able to rest.

Yet the story today is more President Obama not being more popular than President Clinton.

Deft drafting, Mr. President?  

Mr. President, are you past your told of practice of your having brought in presidential historians, seemingly regularly, in your first year to tell you how well they could portray you and your presidency, still?

Mr. President, do you feel like a Tour de France cyclist fouled?

Are you smarting and angry that Bill and Hillary are sprinting past you and after your year and a half doing the hard work of covering for them and their "8"?

Are you, Mr. President, now of inviting historians to The White House to discuss your anger and disappointment in the Clintons together and their disloyalty?

Do you have historians offering you the real plot line of your history of now unpopular most, and foremost, for having put such "cover-up" for the Clintons’ "8" has near your highest priority, and how now they are more popular than you only because you so dedicated your first year and a half to covering up for them and especially with your loud statements encouraging the discouraging of any to "relitigating" such past?

Sure Alberto Contador had a reasonable expectation from his view point with Andy Schleck with derailed chain to have presumed to even assumed Andy such a pro that such should only take him a couple seconds to fix, right?

But the Clintons v. you, Mr. President just seems as foul as the betrayal by Clintons of years of Bush family embracing them, though not nearly (maybe, maybe not) as much as you.

Are your current historians suggesting you by allowing the Clintons such advantage have so cost yourself way more political power than maybe any past president for another? 

Gosh, your allowing them the protection of your draft now has America confused around socialism and now with summer debates able to reach to comparisons and contrastings, and even to a ponderance around "how do we tax or sieze wealth of Russian billionaires" for fair redistribution in an era our Secretary of State should be doing more collecting than giving?  Are not these the years America would have had the greatest advantage towards greater participatory giving by rich peoples of other nations, but for you leaving "Hillary" to try to buy herself some new popularity?

Did Contador see Andy’s chain and think like well the other Schleck could fix it in just a couple seconds >>> time to get going and get out of his way so he has the space to …?

Mr. President is it now beyond "deft drafting" you find yourself so "less popular" and now with your attempting a "cover-up" for the Clintons your looming largest political fault, and so with you maybe even grateful the Republicans with their "no" posture did keep you from making the economics and debt the twice as bad you seemed hell bent towards?

Mr. President how are your historians offering draft to get around such and how such so challenging for your policies while attempting such a "cover-up" have blatantly been in practice of doing the opposite of what the Clintons actually did and while calling it "necessary" to be reversing so much that the Clintons "8" was of?

Still best to go to early and original drafts in times as these?  Time to reboot the Constitution and reverse direction away from global buffoonery rising around discussions of "good socialists" and "bad socialists"?

Mr. President you must be smarting with them getting all the "popularity" from all your work, right? 

Daft draft?



Filed under: — @jphoganorg @ 2:04 am

Stepping back — stepping away?   What is the collatoral assessment/fallout?

How now we pine for "just say no" days of Reagan wizardry?   What Bush?

Well oiled an aged concern, anew wrenching.

Just a "wench"?  Matrimonial bliss?  Wrenching for the "man"?

Stepping back — stepping away?   What are just some of correlations of posture nepotic?

While driving down the street one day a bliss wafted.

While walking down the street one day some traffic congested.

While cycling down the streets all days great vigilance for bliss, wise.

Stepping back — stepping away?   Oh, her history, and, her bias compromised nepotic.

Drafting right, drafting left — daft our Secretary of  State and her political math skills?

Drafting right, drafting left — Summers’ math still of congested posture daft?

Drafting right, drafting left — "Pimped the ride!"?   Madam Sec. Mrs. William J. Clinton?

Stepping away — stepping back?   And: Clintons "two-fer" nepotic and intimate monolith.

How now we pine for "just say no" days of Reagan wizardry?  What Bush?

Well oiled an aged concern, anew wrenching.

Just a "wench"?  Matrimonial bliss?  Wrenching for the "man"?

Stepping away — stepping back?   "Hillary" of political ascent in "nepotism" intimate?

Good socialist but only with Americans’ wealth and/or income and profits?

Good socialist yet so with manifesto incoherent in undrafted and checked aires?

Good socialist not too too too bad except USA getting trapped to "pay for it all"?

Stepping away — stepping back?   "Hillary’s" math of Summers’ daft math posture, ivy?

Conundrum!   Sec. Clinton necessarily "nepotic" and of daft nepotism prosecuting.

Conundrum!   Sen. Clinton hardly not "nepotic" — undemocratic, machined figurehead?

Conundrum!   FLOTUS Clinton slimed by Obama’s numbers, w/ "Bill", more than O?

Stepping away — stepping back?  Time to "litigate" the Clintons’ 8, finally — BIASED?


CONCLUSION:    So years of excesses, but not excesses in regulation, but excesses towards greater tempting, and with farce of "unfunding and underfunding" SAFE course.   Sure our 22nd Amendment seems writ towards embrace of legalese as "poetic" and "romantic" and "holding" as sensual and sexual for and intimate in FLOTUS or FMOTUS (First Mistress).   Some wisdom still parts so "holding" of "holding…" to remind and part posture, intimate and human in the careful writs of our term limits amendment.   As Hillary imparts Afghanistan politics not as the opium elephant in the room but visually a tease or posture ponderance with graphic "hell-man" and when not usually the "or" of "can-get-hard" nuancing of Afghan southern province diplomatic…   Who is responsible for such separate regions/provinces/gerrymandering, Afghan?  Biden? 

Yes our 22nd Amendment specifically uses english in prose to poetry near matching the matching writs of standard marriage vows.   But, Kandahar (can-get-hard?) and Helmand (Hell-man?) hardly the real concern in "Hillary" NEPOTIC of intimate posture and daft past 8 of biased to near racism with shared hosting as FLOTUS not wrenching their "official State policies" as "pro-Sunni" and largely anti-Shia, especially Iraqi Shia?

A "no-confidence vote" against President Barack Hussein Obama is even more condemning to both Clintons?  How counter?   Clearly not a "dumb broad" hurrah!  Seemlessly more just a woman smart for another time?  Summers’ math?

And so with Madam Secretary of State Mrs. William Jefferson Clinton as expendable and fireable as Shirley Sherrod, right?   And with more merit?   Are we past the hype yet?

And so how can we be "proud socialists" at home with "Hillary math" not of a taxing/taking for fair redistribution by also the "Most number of billionaires of living in Moscow" and as well the richest five percent of Mexicans obviously not paying the amount needed to cover all Mexicans such that their subjects are fleeing to be a ______________ to Americans?   "Hillary" a bad "socialist"?   "Hillary" ascent litigateable as "nepotism" to "nepotic"?   How not with luxury of FLOTUS full security and safety blanket especially to abuse to "pomp and circumstance" faux granduer of "earned" yet "not" in appearance of "run" wrought for New York Senate seat? 

She’s pimped our "State", our ride?