8/26/2010

AND IT CAME TO PASS

Filed under: — @jphoganorg @ 3:18 am

The United States of America, in the pre-Obama era of o’ his old law school days, when it still was "America" > a country where it took only one person to change a light bulb.

Funny light bulbs were already around, but still of an "America" where "one could change" - where one could change a light bulb?

Now then we did become a "sole superpower" on our planet and well with many in world strategizing to hoping to trap Americans into being the globes police force at their own expense.

We barely got through those trying 90s.  What a decade of PEACE DIVIDENDS, not of an era of peace, to justify "dividends".   A sole superpower evolution, frought with booby traps around "responsibility" of course now the "responsibility" of The United States of America for see "to the victor goes all the work and new expenses."

If it is not "socialism" what can it be? 

Did President Obama get his new army of "green" political officers for every town and hamlet in America?  Did he?  Did he yet put a federal agent into every light bulb change permit and home remodeling project across our vast tracks of lands?   Does his "Washington" now have those new "political officers" answerable just to federal agent guidlines and now standing at every union job as a new additional overseer?

If it is not "socialism" what can it be?

Devolution? 

Can’t be "cost cutting" can it?

You know,  that it now takes two to three Americans to change a light bulb, and, with a new more efficient lightbulb of greater expense still not necessarily living up to its "longer life" price tag, like?

Where was the world, where was America, when Barry Obama, law student, was just such?

Was it just a "ship of state" "wondering" out to sea?  Or even just into Nantucket Sound?

Did we/were we doin’ the "FDR revival" then, aka "Eleanor revisiting", and now of finding that trying to do it a second time so soon is "self negating", and "canceling"?

In those pre-Obama days whence, when Reaganomics maturing to COLD WAR WON! FINALLY! >>  Those days when it was American pride that it only took one to change, most lightbulbs. >>  Those days nearer fears that Soviet Union would gain control over Middle East oil and an Afghanistan pipeline and Persian warm water ports. >> Ahh, what of the old days, those days that Afghanistan was the "Gettysburg" of the Cold War as the beginning of the end, in battles fought and won against spreading Communist menace, those days of Afghanistan as the turning point in the Cold War?

PASS/FAIL, and now emulating old Soviet system, of "political officers"?

If it is not "socialism" what can it be? 

Well at least it is still "to the victor goes all the responsibility and cost/expense" - right?

How can we question such as the discussed "wisdom" of so many people and countries around the world, such that because the United States won then we must now pay for everything, and change to become more like those we defeated while basically just playing defense?

See it all adds up with Obama’s economics:  Like: 

  1. Who would think that an economy that funds a federal government on profits and income taxation, once more of one could change a lightbulb alone - legally, of course wouldn’t "turtle" with "engines of prosperity" crawling back into their shells, their shells - even starting before "Hillary" came out with her way past "taxation" "take the oil companys’ profits - completely" (like paraphrased) sermon from the mount of basically still FOB, back in early 2007? 
  2. Who could think that Obama’s economics, though maybe failing for so soon trying to do the "Eleanor" or "FDR" revival things so soon again,  wouldn’t so become "a turtle withdrawn inside its shell"?
  3. Who now an "engine of prosperity" not "in its shell" naturally and instinctively for of an era of "economic taking" without a presented "morality" of ROBIN HOOD?
  4. Whom we ask, doesn’t instinctively withdraw when threatened with a "taking" and now of a "taking" fear that seemed of "another taking" as soon as more was there to "take again" and well without even tending to showing all the taking proposed and too real was towards irresponsible spending such that "taking" was of seemingly four to five dollars when those being "taken" from aware that only likely one dollars was needed and "justified" - maybe?

And it came to pass, that the policies of … negated themselves.  It came to pass that the taxation to more spending did lower the revenues, naturally, and seeming luckily still "instinctually".  It came to pass too, that well President Obama’s economic justifications for his "takings", even though seeming halted at "half his goal", were so (expectedly?) to justifying to the "engines of prosperity" the same right to be provided for an with stigma of "not-working" and accepting "free benefits" - as a new right - was soundly of calling them not to need to produce to income or profits, too.  

But, do you now need a "pass" from a new Obama "green" federal building agent employed in near every American hamlet as a "president’s political officer" yet?