Filed under: — @jphoganorg @ 1:19 pm

Is the most disappointing character of these radical Dems that they do not believe enough in their purported causes to take credit for having created crisises necessary for them to have the "popular will" to attempt such an "ushering"?

Have they landed flat for being of a committment short of willingness to be a political martyr for their causes?

Are Dems now looking to November decidings as the time they become political martyrs for not having been willing to be political martyrs?

Is "it is all the fault of Bush’s eight years" only rivaled in American history by "it is all the fault of the past eight years" for political "naivete" and rank stupidity?

Haven’t these Dems have exceeded near every accusation once slammed against Nixon in their own politics where "e-snooping" a favorite tool making political "plumbers" much "old school"?

The Clintons took out two trillion in federal spending and still want to ride popularity for such, and yet Obama wants to blame Bush years for not "spending" on these programs that Clintons still want popularity for having unfunded and underfunded or outright refused new funding justifying. 

The Clintons, especially "Bill" still want to be a hero when quite a budgeting villain, by Obama admin "spending priorities". 

The Clintons, especially "Hillary" still want to be a hero while now so needing to put "bite" in United Nations sanctions that their eight years clearly stand historically of towards "un-bite" and "escape clauses" and "general weakness". 

So how is it Dems have now done more to make America return to a priority around either "THE BEST DEFENSE IS A STRONG OFFENSE" or "THE BEST OFFENSE IS A STRONG DEFENSE"?  

How is it Dems have so made the old despised ways of their parents and grandparents around conservatism a more necessary and wiser, for today, path?  And, seemingly so "accidentally"?

How is it Dems old PEACE DIVIDENDS now so a party before its time but that now for Republicans is a cause for a party, if only the best offense of a "STRONG DEFENSE" fully re-established past the eight years of Clintons and their gross and irresponsible unfunding and underfunding?

Surprise!!!   Clintons still want to be popular!!!   Clintons still want to be popular but have no "foundation" theirs to now stand upon, for such and such so often opposite to President Obama’s argumentst to "necessary".

Nixon was even MUCH better on China, than "Hillary" - then and now, right?



Filed under: — @jphoganorg @ 7:53 pm

Hello "Nancy" - I didn’t expect to be remembering President Reagan’s funeral when I sat down to write tonight.  Hello First Lady Nancy Reagan,  I guess I still cannot think of Ireland without remember all those years I thought the report that your "Ronnie" and I had overlapping family lines from at least a hundred years ago, or two hundred from Ireland.

You really were surprised that Ashley Judd was there for you in Simi Valley service portion, so it seemed, from my perspective and with my muse history and network awareness.

Gosh, this blog is become more Irish than I expected, and just a day after I drove my first bucket of golf balls in the year 2010, while visiting the local Golf Galaxy store the day after "Fluff" won a million.  

Wow, got to love the simulator.   (Yes I thought I was going to write about golf and fit in some chipping at "Hillary" and flags around our Constitution.)

Wow, got to love the simulator for it told me stuff about my golfing I had been without a knowing.  Odd, quite odd that I could drive the ball to nearly the same spot and yet in ten different shots all near straight and carrying at least 210 yards be of finding I basically had ten very different statistics.

So President Clinton is in Ireland, and I am wondering about golf and where my cousin has gotten to who was during much of Clintons’ eight years of still, maybe, the number two station/rank in Dublin Police,  John Reynolds I only knew by family ties, and his son Kevin and our short visiting years ago while he was in US.

I am a golfer named Hogan who is now 45 and yet to have established a "handicap" for I am of only buying my first set of clubs in 2006 and of mostly only finding time to visit many driving ranges and when I could hopefully have found enough time to go through 300-500 golf balls.  I was reminded of those who would observe me around DC yesterday while at play on a simulator and while again of self correcting my swing, and finally with statistics on swing instructive to me to reduce backspin and increase swing speed while maintaining accuracy.   I was reminded for I was often observed for accuracy and near longest drives among those present especially when time was found to use range near the Jefferson Memorial.

President Reagan, hope you are doing fine.

Cousin John Reynolds if you are still a top cop and not already retired, if you see a reason to arrest President Clinton I might find it interesting to write about or talk about while finding golf time.

Hillary, yes, I still think the 22nd  Amendment only makes sense as also a protective bar to a spouse of a term limited president and regardless of sex and especially now while remembering "Nancy’s" reputation especially and as me a writer/blogger of expressing thoughts a spouse may become more annoyed by even than the other more "elected" and quite especially, while wise to POLITICAL, and historical political battles read about warry that it just is too great a threat to First Amendment and freedom of expression to allow one likely more angered during first eight years to get four to eight more years, while still bitter, likely, and, naturally, to exact political payback.  

Just too emotional?

Why do Irish make such great Americans, most of the time? 

America loses too much letting a spouse, regardless of sex, that is once the other spouse in a Presidency and likely more sensitive even before additional sensitivity if one such is also hoping to not let anyone get in their way to getting such couple back into such extreme power position.

I hear for golfers a "pre-shot routine" much considered "necessary".

And still prefer "the pen is mightier than the sword".

RIP President Reagan, we couldn’t be here today, politically, without you.

President Clinton, are you going to attack the superstitions and recent "wizardry" economics of Ireland too?


Filed under: — @jphoganorg @ 9:33 am

So "Bill" has gone rogue.

President Clinton has done more to deminish and defeat himself than the "new media" of "blogging" can quite take credit for, to a blogger.

We have "HIGH CABINET DRAMA"  afoot and main stream media a foul for avoidance and inaction in their charges to duty to cover.

And now the Tea Parties are of the same "power" as Clintons were in their much surprising and uncharacteristic and unexpected rise to 1992 presidential decision.

Do you know the story of the rise of DIFFERENT STROKES television drama - do you know it rose from my playing "I have a black cousin" while trying to win a heart and a date?  Not only did I play proudly "I have a black cousin" I ran scared when I won such heart that had been cold and cold with "but maybe I want to date a black boy".  (I really dispise the whole >."< or ">." grammar option for "rules" seem to call for both for dramatic punctuating.)  Don’t mess with my cousin unless you too know how to teach and fight - are you an expert in kick-boxing and related martial arts or maybe a member of his Cambridge/Boston area dojo?

I wasn’t then running from the "race" issue and not now.   I am of even remembering post "sparking" so while in my mid to early teens then and working in community input around such airing and with "two adopted sons" would be better and healthier for dramatization that seemed to have a mass market, and seemed then timely.

I was in my mid-teens and didn’t see it coming - how was I to prepare for "win" including hearing here parents say "you will have to move in with us" and me then thinking they meant I would have to move out of my parents house a couple blocks away.  Boy I ran, that wasn’t what I thought I was trying to and more of wondering while running why it wasn’t more "she will have to move in with me."

The world of art and entertainment in a wonderful world of community sensitivity and maybe not of needing public funding as much as big government liberals argue.

The Clintons, both of them, are more now who they were before they entered presidential race for 1992.  Both Clintons are back to themselves more themselves and their closer crowd more of "sense of governance by polls" than an "instinct for leadership" and "leadership".   Both Clintons are now more of such again of more trying to make the times fit their ambitions and style than of "leadership" to fit ideas, and hard decidings, for their times.

Do you know who the first elected "Federalist" Governor of Connecticut is/was?

Do you know my New Haven Public High School of 1983 commencement from such was the Wilbur Cross Governors? 

Do you know that Governor Matthew Griswold was the second Governor of Connecticut, as Connecticut a state in our newly formed union, the loose union of states of our constituting to Constitution of our United States of America?

And why do we now not protest our having just one vote in the United Nations and not fifty votes of a loose union like European Union states?

Yes the Clintons are back to being who they truely are and now of sticking President Obama with their old "economic team" and the same "failures" they in their "two-fer" most likely would have been of effecting, and of effecting near the same identical ways.

The DIFFERENT STROKES story, may have come to mind today because "Bill" was doing the ridiculous of slamming "witchcraft" in the era of Harry Potter economy, or because Jim Furyk made "Fluff" a million dollars.

The DIFFERENT STROKES story, may have come back to mind for "Bill" appeared with AG Blumenthal just the other day at my old high school, my old inner city high school where I lived with this daily, and very quietly. 

The DIFFERENT STROKES story, did though come from my running away, not from "race" for she was a blond that looked some bit like the actress cast, and did so come from hearing her parents "misinterpret" my emotions with "he wants different strokes."  I must have been too young for such literature, some - since I thought they were telling me I would have to physically move completely into their home.

So the 22nd Amendment is having its existence to likely embrace spouses in term limiting now being justified by "Bill’s" behavior better than any lawyer not disbarred could.  His acting out, to just a full explanation to such as a full "necessary" justification, to language of 22nd Amendment and its specific similarity to common marriage vows, especially around use of "holding" is now a clearer dramatization than any of my columns and blogs these past few years may yet have accomplished.

And now with "Bill" of more about "race" than just "it not about sex" for now "Hillary" must be smarting for her past as a feminist, now trapped for not of having tried to become president before Bill and so now of it "Bill" not "Hillary" packed and near wrapped up in Rep. Boehner corrugations. 

Yes "Bill" "it is about sex" while "not being about sex"  and mustn’t "Hillary" be smarting now that she has become the "poster child" for 22nd Amendment as Republican writ meant to protect our loosely affiliated states in their Constitution from Democrats again abusing "elections" as FDR family rumored to have with rumors around Eleanor and daughter actually the effective "president" during last years?

Yes the Clintons lack an "instinct to lead" and have their eight years of "avoidance" and "inaction" now demonstrative and accentuated still by President Obama’s Nobel Peace Prize Acceptance Speech and such specific oration to "dangers" of/from "inaction" and "avoidance".   Clintons are now becoming more known for not even being of the "instinct for leadership" where it does surface in their eight years and thought then theirs.  They are becoming their old selves more each day of "crisis" opportunism and "sense of governing by polls".

Yes the Obamas were sold as the new JFKs.   Yes JFK didn’t worry about polls as like the "first TV President" for Kennedy legacy much more of Kennedy family of working the messaging to create the desired polling.

Yes at the heart of the Clintons unpredicted and unexpected rise in 1992 is still a collection of political writing not theirs >> THE CHARGE OF NEW FEDERALISM.

Yes at the heart of the Clintons uncharacteristic rise for those times of many proclaming "President Bush deserves a second term" and especially Senator Al Gore then of saying such in explanation to his "not running" >> is arguably the same common sense of Americans that solidfies now around federalism with Tea Parties, American, anew.

Yes, looking at 1992 the Republicans looked a "dangerous" choice and a party that a re-elected President Bush might not be able to keep moderated as he had by then to date.

Yes, electing Republicans in 1992 may have had dangers that Bush would have been at a loss to control and with dangers around CHRISTIAN COALITION radicalized beyond "family values" to a seeming movement to claim all credit around United States having won Cold War and Persian Gulf War as specifically a "bragging right" for future puffery belonging just to right wing Christians as an American Christians VICTORY.

These are different times.  And, maybe President Bush if re-elected still had it in him to continue his prudent moderation in Republican messaging.

But, yikes, is a day now passing without "Bill" throwing "Hillary" under his political "bus"?



Filed under: — @jphoganorg @ 11:27 am

A funny thing happened on the way to 2008 elections.

A funny thing it was, now even more hillarious heading now into 2010 "mid-terms".

The year was 2006, and on May 24th AN INCONVENIENT TRUTH premiered, titled. Do you remember where you were when Al Gore debuted as harbinger of "end of world is here, now" at least for polar bears?

Was this the "sinking of the Lusitania" that started the anti-capitalist movement at the heart of the "Bush recession" - the warring to recover from anti-capitalist economics, economics?  Was this just a first shot from a rude bridge and so more a "beginning" of revolution than a demarkation to world wide war?

Please bear with me, yes, please – I do not think a depression is funny, nor such a record recessionary period, either, and especially if the wrong and innocent are being blamed.

Do you know who Ivan Vujacic is?  Do you know Ivan Vujacic for whom he was until recall in February 2008? Do you remember President Bush recognizing Kosovo declaration of such February?

Do you know who Robert Conquest is? Do you remember what Ukraine used to be? 

So in all this is Senator Hillary Clinton’s January 20, 2007 announcement to enter race for presidency, this time with her "two-fer" supposedly flipped over all the necessary ways, all the Constitutionally necessary ways, supposedly, even around specific intent and purpose of our 22nd Amendment.

Was it not Al Gore with his anti-capitalis AN INCONVENIENT TRUTH a first shot from a scientifically rude bridge that started to sink our economies - but not so alone?

Was it but for "candidate" "Hillary’s" proclamation to declaration that she meant to "seize oil company profits…" that truely did more to torpedo our economies?

Who did they think they were/are? How did they think they approprietly titled for such though "untitled" Americans?

Well this is where mentioning AEI will likely distract too many from Democrat’s plotting for "neo-cons" still too fresh a misleading accusation:

See, I know Ivan Vujacic, former Ambassador to the United States from the Embassy of The Republic of Serbia.

See, I know him near the funniest way possible - take that Stephen Colbert. 

See, he sat down next to me over lunch one day, while nearly sitting on the inside window ledge of the AEI event room, and we engaged in what could be said to be "small talk."

Well, by the time Serbia recalled their Ambassador to the United States after President Bush had supported Kosovo declarations I was no longer inside the beltway but "back in Connecticut" after near ten years in DC.

Well, it still isn’t funny talking about a recession not "as bad" since The Great Depression.

Well, it isn’t "funny" that Serbia recalled their Ambassador Ivan Vujacic, either.

But, well, it was Ambassador Ivan Vujacic after casually sitting down next to me at AEI event either on November 6 or 7th of 2007 of telling me like: "Even top Republicans are telling him to expect Senator Hillary Clinton to become the next president."  (This is where it gets funny.)

I was at AEI for their event "UNDERSTANDING POLITICAL VIOLENCE AND REPRESSION IN OUR TIMESThe Work of Robert Conquest".  Ivan Vujacic was there because Robert Conquest was there, I do not know why he sat down next to me - but we did get talking about 2008 elections and Bush’s Iraq efforts.

See it seems funny that the one person I explained with greatest detail yet and maybe still of my reasons around stating not only that Senator Clinton wouldn’t win but that she shouldn’t win, either is still to this date, for "conversations", none other than Ivan Vujacic, Ambassador to United States of the Embassy of The Republic of Serbia.

So the time-line of around our economy sinking seems to fit with> first shot by Al Gore from a rude scientific bridge > but unable to have succeeded in general Democrat anti-capitalism torpedoing but for Senator Hillary’s declaration of intent to "seize oil company profits…" and beyond any to date sense of/around "fair taxation".

So the "neo-cons" are still supposed to be the "bad guys" yet "neo-colonialists" fits as a "tag" more properly accusatory to Dems.

Robert Conquest, born July 15, 1917, that is known most as a "British Historian" seems currently post his fame as author of THE GREAT TERROR with more professorial duties around and in COMMONWEALTH OF INDEPENDENT STATES at the Hoover Institute.

Ambassador Ivan Vujacic is one of my "witnesses" to my having been right and quite thorough in my reasoning back then in early November 2007 as regards my prediction to declaration around >> top Republicans are wrong to like tell him Hillary could be assumed to be the next president of the United States.  He is the one person to whom my reasoning also included a full support of Bush’s Operation Iraqi Freedom and with spur of moment adjustment to relate to Serbia and Kosovo as like a necessary pursuit of "standard operating procedure" by "neo-cons" at a time United States had no great choice but to try to create a more standard SOP.

Yes, I still believe Hillary should not even have entered 2008 race and is now arguably quite the worst nomination for Secretary of State that President Obama could have made, but for many arguements maybe possible to "need to get her out of Senate" no matter the cost.

President George W. Bush presented the PRESIDENTIAL MEDAL OF FREEDOM to Robert Conquest in November 2005.

Funny too, that if Al Gore and Hillary Clinton had been of "royal" titles we all would now have much less to say and express around concerns relating to them having "dirty hands" in sinking of Bush’s economics. 

Is it fair not to now look at the eight years of Clintons’ "two-fer" even if what we find also is less than "funny"? 



Filed under: — @jphoganorg @ 7:25 pm

This should get you through the weekend and past Iran’s President’s United Nations’ pointed orations as Ahmadinejad’s.  Not past them as fully discardable - but past them with a consideration of such as them of showing opportunities for progress, maybe.

There was a whole lot of specific nuance.

There was a whole lot of "wiggle room" for him with his commentary if you can discern how and where he nuanced to differentiate between Clintons and Bush.  He may certainly have gone far more than seems reasonable to most, and incontrovertibly. 

How much is horse trading?

How much is dramatization overt to uncover unconversed not necessarily covert?

It is at least reasonable how he offered to converse upon clear demarcations surrounding "lays of land" different between Clintons’ eight years and Bush’s eight years.

Obama cannot run from such - it is on our 2010 and 2012 campaign tables.

Obama cannot run from such just for Clintons’ in their "two-fer" so of starting their eight years (yes it does get annoying discussion Clinton’s as Clintons’ but again they asked for "two-fer" status) ummm… ummm… oh, yes, right, …of starting their eight years with an asking of Middle East leaders to give them a blank slate and with a specific posturing to blaming American Republicans for all or most of existing Anti-American attitudes then present.

See we cannot "take back" "Hillary’s Crusades" and her traveling Middle East region like an imperialist with dictates upon how that region and especially its radical and radicalized and those also easily radicalized needed to change to the American ways she was dictating they should.  We cannot take back much of Clintons’ eight years of "Hillary" not alone in trash talking to such region and especially existing "radicalized."

Obama has a "Hillary Problem" more than his own problem around his opposition to Operation Iraqi Freedom also a rending of justice upon Saddam Hussein for his indisputable role in near a million Irani deaths.  Cold War "justifications" only go so far and can only go to point in discussions where opportunities haven’t existed past such for "corrective" policies.

Sure President Obama has a serious problem around diplomatic relations with Iran for being of once and still opposing Operation Iraqi Freedom, but his "Hillary Problem" seems greater for being an endorsement as well of Clintons’ eight years of avoidance and inaction around Iraq and Iran, largely, and of great import today even without "Hillary’s" trash talking than can be argued as "inciting" to 9/11 suspects.

See, President Ahmadinejad nuanced his orations such that Clintons eight years and now
"Hillary’s" leadership (sense of governance) slighted far more than Bush and his team.  Iran’s President actually defended Bush’s troop levels in Iraq and near complimented Bush for having not put "occupation level" troops into Afghanistan.  It is there not even just "between the lines" in Ahmadinejad’s characteristic dramatization.  It is there some but not so much such that he blames Iran for not having helped its neighbor Afghanistan those eight years America had more "responsibilty" (maybe?) to during the Clintons’ eight years.

Yes Ahmadinejad could have blamed Irani people as much as Clintons for their avoidance and inaction around Afghanistan during their eight years, but it wasn’t Iran that left a vacuum in Afghanistan with its earlier departure that left room for Taliban before Taliban had room to give Al Qaeda.

So from President Ahmadinejad’s United Nations oration it seems President Bush actually did much to improve relations with Iran, and necessarily with Operation Iraqi Freedom and sense around trading with Afghans with road and school building then for "permission" to be in their country, not as an occupation force, to chase mostly foreigner camping there with purposes to radical reactions while less radical options still seemingly available to and for similar "ends."

Seems that today around Iran issues that President Obama could not have a worse choice of Secretary of State than his - Mrs. Hillary Rodham Clinton.

So how can we move forward and build on the progress the Bush team effected with Operation Iraqi Freedom that the Bush’s eight years seem to have effected with Iran?

How do we get past the Clintons’ eight years and their avoidance and inaction that left issues present then to festering among Iraqi and Irani Shia and peoples?

Seems we cannot remove as "rediculous" statements in President Ahmadinejad’s commentary that revolve around Clintons for their eight years and years since, and especially now with President Obama and his clinging to "Bush was wrong…" to be more to repeating the seeming clear religious - official religious bias - the Clintons showed to Sunni at expense of Shia in Iraq and Iran.

President Ahmadinejad may only have a case against Clintons and Obama for characteristic "not letting a crisis go to political waste" as he seemed to profer such an accusation, and, well he too may only have a case against such for naivete and incompetance in ways his nuancing suggests doesn’t exist around Bush and his team.

The Clintons’ eight years are "on the table" and with at least "naivete" and "incompetance" in our 2010 and 2012 political decidings.  

Hillary was of traveling to regions President Ahmadinejad was commenting around and of "trash talking" nearer "imperialist dictating" in her crusadings, well cheered and discussed but not quite to satisfaction yet of Iran.

Yes President Obama is risking being seen as officially "religiously biased" as Clintons were their eight years with their official policies seeming PRO-SUNNI at the expense of Iraqi and Irani Shia. 

Seems Clintons thought Saddam Hussein was a "necessary" ally to be slowly let out of sanction for like > Iraqi Shia are not capable of governing themselves.

There is much that cannot be ignored nor discarded in Iran’s President’s recent orations at the United Nations.  And, really, we cannot keep ignoring and avoiding discussion of the Clintons and specifically the Clintons’ eight years.

President Ahmadinejad seemed to point out that President Bush was very wise not to have put more troops into Iraq earlier, and to have avoided such levels that Iran would clearly have taken as "occupation level" and maybe insulting to region.

Obama has a "Hillary Problem" but, well, I may have to take back that his "opposition to Operation Iraqi Freedom" is not a bigger diplomatic problem now hindering further improvement with Iran - United States relations now present from President Bush "standing with" in Iraq towards effecting a mending, like, for hard and ugly compromises in past seemingly unavoidable during years of struggles to thwarting global spread of Soviet Socialism.

And, well I still am not ready to take back my opined around Iran with nuclear weapons should feel more motivated to target Russia than America, and even after Russia’s help towards such where if and when or how such did or may have happened.  

Iran is Iran today as much for having been on Soviet side during Cold War as anything else in Iran’s President’s United Nations oration. 

Clintons were wrong to have asked Middle East leaders back in 1993 to just blame American Republicans, right?  If it "makes sense" I still haven’t figured out how.



Filed under: — @jphoganorg @ 9:31 am

A feminist interpretation could be that Mrs. William Jefferson Clinton, now Secretary of State, did give spouse enough "rope" to get to this bitter end all by his lonesome, his lonesome though so publicly, anew.  That her encouraging "Bill" this week was just a plot by "Hillary" to finally break out of "shadow of Bill" could be "believable."

A bitter end, yes!

But really it seems the drama this week, this week while we as Americans should be of spending more time asking ourselves how we got here - here to the United Nations meeting again and so with European Union states having more votes than our Union of states!

How are we now so caught up in drama of President Clinton of "throwing Mrs. under the proverbial political bus"?   How are we to such a bitter end of "Bill’s" anchor rode with "Hillary" so recent to set around LAST CHANCE FOR PEACE?

But really why do European Union states still have more votes in United Nations than our Union of states?

And, how rude was it for President Clinton under pretext of CGI-2010 as a non-partisan happening to go political and pointedly so against President Bush last night after First Lady Laura Bush and daughters "participated" under ground rules of "non-partisan" pretext profered by Clinton Global Initiative?  Not quite the "throwing under the bus" dealt Mrs. William Jefferson Clinton, our current Secretary of State?  But close?

Can it really be profered that "Hillary" is of encouraging "Bill" and giving him the rope to find, very publicly, the bitter end to uncontrolled drift now of his going political and superior, especially to her, to her thought still with some ambition of her own, not just of returning "Bill" to White House with his desire still to be the rightful "president" in their "two-fer"?

But really, how are we standing for such distractions while maybe without a fair number of votes at the United Nations tables this week?

I don’t quite know what to make of this behavior and stagecraft so to "Bill" and his false sense of "superiority" especially as it seems a defeat to feminism yet while appearances have it as billed to improve feminism.  That and his mad political attacks on President Bush administering witnessed last night in his interview with Judy Woodruff on PBS Newshour, yikes!

Well, President Obama and then First Lady Michelle Obama are scheduled near last at CGI2010 and maybe can effect the necessary "intervention" to right course now drifting uncontrolled with "Bill’s" hands of passing the bitter end.

How can this week be spun but as "Bill of throwing Hillary under the bus"? 

Can Obamas right the course and get Clinton ship in tow with a timely intervention and such a seeming much necessary one?

I don’t know what this means to feminism, but do see it seeming muddies waters around such and even in Middle East efforts working to improve rights for women there.

Anyone?  Anyone?  Anyone?  

Is it to be covered either in President Obama’s United Nations remarks or closing remarks for CGI that will be followed there by First Lady Michelle Obama’s closing remarks, or even maybe the soon to be announced Republicans new mission statement out today?

Oh, how sad that a President can let slide so much.  How said the old "passing of the buck" after 9/11 attacks of Clintons and their people of "blaming America" and not their own "leadership" - or what is more discriptive of Clintons than "leadership" and simpler: "sense of governing"!  Sure America needed to heal and doing political divisive may not have helped at all but Clintons blaming Americans by taking to >>blue states said do this and that…and we just did what America told us via our polls to do? 

Just sad!  Sad but maybe just this reaching of such a public "bitter end"?



Filed under: — @jphoganorg @ 4:48 pm

Is it what was "heard" or more what was "witnessed" this week of CGI?

Was it the end of feminism, feminism as we have known it?

Did Madam Secretary of State Mrs. William Jefferson Clinton play it so?

Just unbelievable, really unbelievable – The Secretary of State of our United States of America arrives and speaks about her "dirty stoves" - and of too many cooks around her "dirty stoves" - uhh?

Secretary of State Clinton now ten years out of White House as First Lady and eight years as such and now, only now, we are hearing of her "dirty stoves" - uhh?

I guess you all witnessed the death of feminism as we have known it. 

What will you do now?

What is President Barack Obama and First Lady Michelle Obama to do now, now that they finally may be rid of the Clintons’ economic advisors and administers, some how to date, like too many cooks around Clinton’s "dirty stoves"?

Maybe I just imagined that the Secretary of State of our United States of America showed up at "Bill’s" CLINTON GLOBAL INITIATIVE and talked about "dirty stoves" - and for as the first we were hearing about such from them near twenty years after "Bill" was sworn in as President for the first time?

Is President Obama now almost rid of all the Clintons’ economic experts and maybe free to move us past what he can easily still sell as "Clintons’ Jobless Recovery"?

What does it mean to feminism for our Secretary of State of our United States of America to have shown up at her hubbie’s GLOBAL INITIATIVE annual gathering of groupies so demure and domestic with such modest talk around her "dirty stoves" and too many cooks around such?

Has "Hillary" declared her "feminism" a farse?   Has "Hillary" prostrated herself, though an officer of Obama’s cabinet and quite inappropriately?

But really, this is real politics and "hard ball" arena in which we just witnessed a demure Secretary of State speaking to her "dirty stoves" and too many cooks around such even though she now past eighteen years since first stepping on soap box of First Ladydom!

Inappropriate?   Inappropriate and quite telling?  Inappropriate and quite telling too of internal issues in Obama’s cabinet of too many cooks too? 

Could she have made her "loyalties" any more clearer?  Could she have spoken on a subject to more demureness?

Should we have seen this all coming even before the Clintons attempted a highjacking of Bush’s presidency and presidential political effecting?

Should we have seen this all coming back just when "Bill" tried to get the taxpayers to pay for his post presidency LOCATION as NEW YORK BANKING ALLEY - the near most expensive rental space available - when "Bill" tried to move in with the banks?

How are we only now hearing of "Hillary’s" "dirty stoves" and too many cooks around such?

It is easier to explain how Clintons highjacked the Bush presidency than to explain such, and even to explain how misguided President Bush may have been not to lead with the "blame game" as President Obama has, with a daily to hourly "all the fault of the past eight years".

We should have seen this as soon as we became wise to "Bill" trying to use "Hillary" to get them both into the White House, for such "perspective" re-educates and changes interpretation once left to more ‘innocent’ past rendings?

And, then President Clinton set tone on eve of Initiatives last day with a beat that doesn’t still add up and seems near insane >>> as on PBS Newshour in interview with Judy Woodruff - like:  President Bush could have a should have kept the Clintons budgeting all eight years of Bush admin.  Uhh?  That is like wrapping up #cgi2010 like saying "thanks for coming but we should all go back to year 2000 committment levels." 

Note:  The Clintons not only took too much out of federal budget when taking out near two trillion in spending to deep surplus budget but did so very irresponsibly even for that amount if possible for not actually of "necessary" job and infrastructure spending as an amount that was cut in way too short a period of time.   Maybe Bill doesn’t remember some disasters happened and left us realizing he had grossly underfunded and unfunded "NECESSARY" programs. 



Filed under: — @jphoganorg @ 4:16 pm

It was the best of times, it was the best of times, it was the best of times - and now President Jimmie Carter >  I was a better President than Clintons?

It was the worst of times, it was the worst of times, it was the worst of times - and now President Barack Obama > just "tongue in cheek" with "all Bush’s fault" for now a presidency clear in spending priorities certainly towards spending, spending with some discretion, near a full trillion of the two trillion Clintons still say wasn’t necessary?

It is today, it is today, it is today - and now President Clinton seeming confident his personality wouldn’t have us in this mess President Obama and his personality has us?  - and now President Clinton like with confidence a miracle economic cure for jobs just out there right in front of all of us?

Could it be, could it be, could it be - and without > if it is than mustn’t it be of Clintons’ as saboteurs, and so of sabotaging of Obama’s economics?  

It is this week, it is this week, it is this week - nothing but a week to be kind and near charitable to a former President even if much of legacy left and especially the sad economics of his irresponsible and rash budgeting to near a trillion in surplus, so at core of current economic problems?

Next speaker please, next speaker please, next speaker please!

But it cannot be, it cannot be, it just can’t be that these so our trying times are not of from the Clintons irresponsible chase for surplus popularity and it as a great and vast underfunding of federal jobs saving and creating needed to balance their irresponsible pushing of risky loans so such as an unfunded federal social program!


OH NO!  OH MY!  OH ME O’ MY!  

It all adds up, it all adds up, it all adds up - and yes to the Clintons and their PEACE DIVIDENDS and eight years of claiming their "intelligence" justified cutting two trillion from spending, and so rapidly that peace can only have been concluded to be here to stay for decades.   How else to explain their "slashing and burning" of just defense and intelligence budgets?  How else to explain now how much Clintons said didn’t need or deserve federal spending of that near trillion also cut seeming just for popularity thought impossible for effecting SURPLUSES, that spending such that President Obama has been having to declare spending on so much that Clintons told us, as Democrats, that such wasn’t necessary?

Are neither Clinton even half a Carter?   Mustn’t President Obama be of "tongue in cheek" when claiming it "all Bush’s fault" and so when so doing the opposite in budgeting so clearly counter to Clintons declarations of need?

And so it is, and so it is, and so it is - And so it is a week to be kind and near charitable to a former President, but not so much to let him think he is still President or a King?

What did Sandy Berger try to remove from Archives, anyways?

And Lanny Davis, it was near enough two trillion Clintons so suddenly removed from long established and now known to be near critical federal spending programs/budgets, yes?

Former Clinton Nation Security Council member Philip Bobbitt it was basically you of saying in TERROR AND CONSENT that it is dangerous for a White House to be too close and involved with Hollywood for such tends to "beget" terrorism, right?

But Secretary of State Hillary Clinton what were you thinking trying to over dramatize with LAST CHANCE FOR PEACE for you Middle East Peace trip?   That needs some justification and explanation, as well as "Bill’s" economics that suggest sabotage to President Obama’s attempts to top Clinton economic leadership. 

Same as it ever was, same as it ever was, same as it ever was - and a week to be near charitable to a former President, but only so far?

And well then there is the more cynical ‘economic spin’ now with "Bill’s" quick fix - sort of now of hashing out the seeming poor spin near a year ago where Obama admin looked at risk of showing their hands has hands of the economic downfall doing when of trying to pivot on convenient crisis and claim all was already better, and better but of course -well of then so of blaming Bush economics for downfall really of their own doing with "crisis" needed to make them instant successes without track record of accomplishment to justify or explain.  

So we were on a better path and more the right path under Bush, and in more ways than one?  We could have addressed even Global Warming concerns by creating two or more new industries without tanking those their ways did? 

Can you say desalination plants and solar roofing shingles?  And filters like in APOLLO 13 movie that was of getting like a square filter to fit in a round filter hole, but larger and of basic PVC materials able to clean and filter carbons of greenhouse gases out of environs before they rose to high into atmosphere? 

Wouldn’t desalination plants have created jobs around the world and also dealt well with fears of rising ocean levels, and if used to irregation have lowered temperatures where distributed onto terra firma even deserts?

I still like my idea for an internation fleet of NUCLEAR CHILLER SUBMARINES able to travel ice cap areas and work to chill and refrigerate warmer waters approaching in currents.   Maybe even as an international fleet of yellow nuclear submarines with refrigeration tubes and external systems with windows and cruise amenities attractive even to Virgin Cruises and Disney’s.

After all, after all, after all - we have known how to make ice for a long time. 



Filed under: — @jphoganorg @ 8:21 pm

America, you have a duty this week, a near sacred duty this week.

America, you have a duty and calling like never before harkened to as now so necessary.

America, your President needs your help.

America, your President really needs your help and its like Constitutional HELP!!! he needs.

America, are you willing to help your President, this week of such Constitutional need as Clintons are making necessary?

America, are you ready - all of you - this week ready to do your Constitutional DUTY and help your President, President Barack Hussein Obama?

America, are you ready to fight the autocratic reaching still of monolith in Clinton "two-fer" still, especially this week, of reaching for extra-Constitutional power?

Jim Carey>> You realize ME MYSELF AND IRENE story line came from happenstance around me those two days of my being an extra in AMISTAD courtroom scenes with Steven Spielberg and Morgan Freeman and such present with Paul Gulfoyle there as well with Pete Postlewait (sp?)? And that before Governor Clinton became President I was known for as many facial expressions and where Irish cap backwards as you are now known for?   See a policing cadet/student name Irene was working security on set, and well after my couple days I visited friends and ended up with their friends and a couple studying crimology under Henry Lee while also so grouped drinking mudslides with off-duty Rhode Island State Troopers.

Lance Armstrong>>  Great work these years carrying our banner.  I guess you are not the only famous American up from Austin, Texas hard rides.   It seems you rode better when clearly riding for American capitalism and not this year confused to maybe American socialism.   Well, being back to cycling myself this year, an older man in cycling, and not nearly as old as President Barack Obama who is four years older to the day:  Yes it is time for me to start shopping at least a new saddle.  Vintage Advocet Racing III saddle I mail ordered from Palo Alto back in those days after meeting Erik Heiden in New Haven as he headlined first Columbus Day Weekend Bike Race just off his Olympic skating victories, has held up over thousand miles this year but not without some glass and epoxy on plastic base.  Those were the days I was neighborhood bike mechanic for professionals tasked to needing to stay strong in the arms with surgical lances in pediatric neurosurgery, and well with my able to borrow time on another neighbor’s Park truing stand, and one neighbor those years unknown by me to have been a Yale bud of "W".

America, are you ready to do your Constitutional DUTY this week and help President Obama remind, as likely needed "per hour" and "per day", not just President Clinton but all our fellow Americans to us now of Presidency of Obama and not just a "deputy president Obama - still under President Clinton"?

Demi and Ashton>>  Well how many people get the "cycling" in your relationship with history of cycling shorts to both of you with Ashton’s being like named the province of India most cycling chamois was then coming from?

America, this is a tough week for all of us, but none maybe more than President Obama with him needing to try to maintain some sense of "relevance" with so much scheduled Clinton puffery.   Especially confusing still is how it is all the fault of eight years of one up from Austin but yet while President Obama is actually most of the time of selling doing the exact opposite of type of budgeting as Clintons did.

Well America maybe it will help this week as you are called to help President Obama in Constitutional DUTY by reminding world whom is now really our president to be of imaging the "inheritance" left President Bush as a "two-fer" of (yes, this time two meaning defined as two - not as one or not two), of two JENGA! towers each played only by Bill or Hillary left next President and First Lady played to "see we left you two towers standing" — "we did good" >>>

BUT, such an inheritance such that next president and spouse had at most only two or three pieces they could touch or play before JENGA!!!

America, President Obama really needs your help this week, as never before - please it is a matter of protecting our Constitution.

CGI attendees>>> I was working from memory here and do not remember whom all was listed such today when I had a few minutes to look.   Hello First Lady Laura Bush, you seem to have your eight years covered, hope you don’t mind I was only asking Americans to help protect Obamas.



Filed under: — @jphoganorg @ 9:50 am

Note: This is not part of my "Hollywood Series" - I hope.

Per chance to dream.   Per chance to dream "American Dreams" more understandable.

Do we need to look critically at Al Qaeda?

Do we need to look at Saddam Hussein, necessarily, for likely thinking America would let him keep Kuwait?

Do we need to look at Iran and Iran Shia insurgents maybe of having a "justification" for disrupting "progress" in Iraq of Operation Iraqi Freedom once it turned more to the near three different wars happening in Iraq simultaneously?

Do we, necessarily, need to look at the state of America’s major urban centers and especially New York City at the time of Saddam’s invasion of Kuwait and that world could easily have been sold on an interpretation like:  Saddam Hussein ran Baghdad better than any United States major city was then being run?

And, on today’s economics and especially specialties in "urban economics" and governance philosophies related:   Are we now at a time in history, and around "federal spending" and "government size" issues such that now, especially with new techonolgy to empowering as never before, we should wax to considerations that an urban center such as New York City and its five boroughs should be able to sustain and fund itself without any federal spending/funds?

And, on today’s economics how can we not look at current state of technologies and class and social and economic differentials and not, necessarily, fully discuss that NYC should be able to fund itself and as the next step towards improving its community and real governance.  

If New York  City cannot fund itself - WHY??? 

If such a metropolitan area with enough riches and rich people cannot present an economics and social argument with a fair distribution not a national socialist "redistribution" how can we argue for a national socialist "redistribution"?

With Saddam Hussein having better run Baghdad but having been a horrible neighbor, and with Al Qaeda reportedly of a rise to bring justice to Saddam Hussein for his un-neighborly invasion of Kuwait, that President George H. W. Bush didn’t rush into Baghdad takes on a greater "understandability".   Bush seemed right not to rush into Baghdad and so much more on Saddam’s timing of his strategic calculus around thinking America would let him keep Kuwait or risk, or risk, or risk serious new more dangerous conflicts.  So Operation Iraqi Freedom turned into like three separate wars within Iraq and largely because the eight years of Clintons did not bring "sufficient" justice upon Saddam Hussein to the satisfaction of Al Qaeda or Iran Shia?   So, sanctions, sanctions, and sanctions but such thought to be with "bite" of a re-election of President Bush with a clear willingness to return to Baghdad within just maybe leaving Saddam just three years to fully comply - or else?   So Operation Iraqi Freedom cost so much more in lives and American dollars specifically because the Clintons’ eight years let fester "anti-Americanism" around the festering "abandonment" felt from US and Coalition having left so many Iraqi hanging by not going immediately after Saddam Hussein?  

That, and maybe the surge wouldn’t have been necessary if Clintons, instead of flip-flopping "CYA" style did own up to their years as much a foul and ignored that shouldn’t have been - that Clintons had stood on honor and fought the dumb down of complex regional and internal issues in and around Iraq that became the American mindset with the "anti-war" movement leading the mass dumbing?  

Oh no!   The surge was necessary because the Dems manufacturing of "anti-war" movement was too much of an effecting, intentional, to dumbing down complexities such that not only did Americans not know enough about the real issues in November 2008 but also Iraqi insurgents had cause and motivation to fight the efforts of Bush administration for an early victory for Bush would support the dumbed down messaging the Clintons were supporting?



Filed under: — @jphoganorg @ 12:20 am

So you didn’t know there is/was a horse glue factory heading north out of Hades? 

Well, did you ever hear of a symposium called "FEDERALISM - EVOLUTION OR DEVOLUTION"? 

I don’t recall if it covered Cuba going "private sector" - "free enterprise" but do recall a politician saying something even more befuddling than Newt Gingrich recently speaking to ‘anti-colonialist ghost’ guiding President Obama, like, like from Africa and, his dead dad.

I do remember meeting this politician then in mid 90s at the Joseph Slifka Center.  It was not Newt Gingrich, but an as well or better known politician.  I did miss the opening day of this gathering to "symposed" hosted by Yale Law School with most venues at such venue.   I was in the neighborhood, but late to learning my near favorite subject was being publicly discussed and symposed upon with a discussion of the evolution and devolution of federalism.

What a wonderful day, today -so full of so much "counter-culture"!   Cuba - Cuba to freer markets so so "counter-culture" to Gore’s green hegemony and especially Obama/Clinton machinations to anti-capitalism.   And, surprise:  WALL STREET - the sequel - as no other sequel could be so timed to be more "counter culture" to dogma of Gorists and Obamanaughts. 

[I so wanted to work in Denzel Washington and Cuba Gooding Jr. into today’s in "Hollywood Series" but seem to have to wait and even wait to work in Sidney Poitier maybe with a IN THE BEAT OF THE NIGHT, but, well all this COUNTER CULTURE just too much for too few words.]

Oh, yes the other famous politician of saying something more confounding and confusing than Newt Gingrich’s recent "anti-colonialism" (maybe in a double negative) was none other than Vice President Joseph Biden with his either "federalism is devolving" or "federalism is evolving" sympostic concluding.

So complicated!   "Anti-colonial" from what perspective, Mr. Gingrich - please?  Kenya shouldn’t try to have colonies… so President Obama should have colonies???   "Obama is engaged in Kenyan anti-colonial behavior…"  is that what you said?  What can that possibly mean?  Obama while acting with a "neo-colonialist" ferver is acting as Kenya did to try not to be a colony of another?

So complicated!   "Federalism is devolving."???  Vice President Biden, and yes with me having missed the opening day to maybe here some "parameters" on "evolution" versus "devolution"  specific to sympostic debate upon federalism?   Even "federalism is evolving" is too confused and like a "double negative" - which ever it was you concluded can you please elaborate?   Seems if "federalism" as it seemed in those 90s were to "devolve" that would be a good think like what we seem to have now with Tea Parties, but, I don’t think that is what you were concluding.  Weren’t you concluding that federalism "devolving" was like a good thing for then more centralized socialisms would become the norm?   But then if it were "federalism is evolving" and especially in those 90s that would imply federalism was to improving for greater survival like now so the seeming good thing of these Tea Party revolvings.

So complicated!  But keeping me up to write tonight for not going without "awareness":  Oliver Stone doing "counter culture" now with WALL STREET the sequel out just in time to help me stay out of President Obama’s way as he keeps seeming to head in the wrong direction.  I have myself to blame for that, and luckily.   As many are realizing tonight, and keeping me up around such surprising "COUNTER CULTURE" out by Hollywood,  President Obama nor Al Gore could be welcoming WALL STREET the sequel for it surely is now out and saving many as out for capitalism, again.  

Yes, I feared Dems were trying again to go where they wanted to go in 1993 but couldn’t. 

Yes, I feared for irreversible slide from such Dem inactings and gave them the room to effect such recently while far less at stake around the world at risk with them "trying their ideals".

Yes, I feared for irreversible slide and got clear of President’s way but for realizing we needed a sequel to WALL STREET put in the works.

Viva, la capitalism.   And, thank you Vice President Joseph Biden, of Delaware - I know no other "conclusion" as a simple statement to the symposed that still defies on its face understanding.

Newt Gingrich, yes - you are in the running now with "anti-colonialism" seeming a contradictory double negative or negating doubled posit.

I do not know if there really is a horse glue factory with Hades to the south.

For those late to my blogging:  I authored a collection of political prose/letters and poetry in early 90s towards effecting greater momentum for much positive change and also to specifically help Governor Clinton become electable in 1992 with a learning of such beat.  This is now the collection I am proud of, but for the "Clinton got elected" part, taking it further than I meant, so titled appropriately THE CHARGE OF NEW FEDERALISM.  But for Ross Perot my assistance so near charitable to Dems was meant to be enough to engage them and do so staying short of keeping President Bush from a second term.

It is complicated!   Dems were mostly as a party following the first string candidates away from running and at near a run.   President Bush deserved someone to give him a fight, and well Governor Clinton nearly the only one left by such time new world order making some major waves.  

Thank you Hollywood.   Thank you Oliver Stone - especially for what now is so seemingly necessary COUNTER CULTURE and a bright beacon back for America to American.

Cubans >> Are you becoming more Chinese or more American?  It is hard to tell.



Filed under: — @jphoganorg @ 8:21 am

***RIP:  Paul Newman. >>>  Ghost of Paul Newman, please take your mark.***


 >>> Denties De Ville’s Tragedy - a play of bad actors <<<

{stage} King Blythe III enters from left being pushed, orderly like, in a wheel chair.

{stage} Queen Rodham, with smoke and fire around, naturally, rises from middle of stage floor, in red pant suit.

{stage}  Above a yet unidentified ghost seems dominant and present.

>Curtain now open and now longer swaying distractingly to: dogs, dogs, and more dogs.

>Queen Rodham, rising in red has unleashed the hounds, no, no, no, not hounds but?

{stage} Scene still covered with smoke and mirrors - hard to see what is happening.  Ghost appearing to fade but somehow still seems dominant.

>King Blythe III:   Are we there yet?   Are we there yet?  Are we there yet?

>Queen Rodham:  (no comment)  (no sense of noticing presence of King)

>Dalmatian one:   woof, woof, woof!!!  Follow me!!! We got to get out of this place.

[Dramatic note:  playwright is in a job retraining program - trying to stay out of President way - still uniformed to writ differences between Holy Muslim ghosts and Holy Christian ghosts.  Playwright teaching himself to be better writter - Gail Collins seems a fan.  Anna Quindlan maybe wishing "new" playwright" was still just a poet with only MEET ROSS PEROT, his only short skit/play.]

>Audience (interactive media too):  Where are we?  Where are we?  This doesn’t look like Arkansas, where are we?

>Audience (imt):  Is that an ark?  It that gilded MR. SMITH’S an ark - are we in Georgetown?

>Dalmatian two:   Follow him!  Follow him!  Follow him!  He’s heading north if you get separated.   {most dogs stop and shake, and shake and shake what seems the waters of Hades, the Styx, off them and start running again.

>Newt’s Ghost:  Yes, head north, and fast, may the wind be at your back and friendly.  You got to get out of this place, hurry, and vere clear of the horse glue factory.

{stage}  Identity of "Newt’s" "ghost" still not revealed nor its traditions though seeming dominant, somehow, still.  Looks a little like Dr. Livingstone or maybe Lawrence of Arabia - looks can be deceiving.

{stage}  Two small young Dalmatian puppies seem left behind and oddly "matching" enough to be a keen pair of matching gloves or maybe boots.   Woofs are heard - concerned - and seemingly "approaching".

>King Blythe III:  Are we there yet?  Are we there yet?  Are we there yet?

>Queen Rodham:   Rahm?  Have you seen my trident, I can’t seem to find my trident?  Rahm?  Did Blagojevich take it home again under pretense that he would set up the "Birthplace of Queen Rodham Museum" for me now that a "Queen Cruella Rodham Presidential Library Museum" no longer in our jokes and small talk?

>Newt’s ghost:   ooooooo,  oooooooo,  oooooooo, Ha! Ha! Ha!

>Audience (imt):  in spontaneous outbursting of:  run! ru…n!  Ru…un! RUN! RUN! RUN!!!

>Queen Cruella Rodham:  Rahm, I am serious - do you know where my trident is?  And, hey do you have any idea who this "spirit" is hanging around me like an Albatross?  Doesn’t quite look "Chicago" enough to be here, see?

>Newt’s ghost:   Have you read DREAMS OF MY FATHER?  Have you read DREAMS OF MY FATHER?  ooooooooo!   oooooooooo!  oooooooooo!  Ha! Ha! Ha!

{stage}  Albatross around her neck - imagined, to be left to audience imagination hopefully vivid with birds talons clasped around Queen Cruella Rodham’s next but not with "flight"/"lift off" yet effected.  To just the imagination - hopefully not to a gilded-stuffed Albatross as trophy hanging as bling.

>King Blythe III’s orderly (wearing a beret):  You have arrived, dear King - your queen looks, well, looks kinda like, u no omg - out of place.

>Queen Rodham:  Dearest King, finally, what took you so long - cross the river - move towards the heat - and please, dearest, get to that big rock over there at the base of that hill on left.  And please, get out of that chair, it wasn’t a certifiable medical deduction. 

>Queen Rodham:  Why is it so quiet?  Rahm why is it so quiet?  It was so a bustle and noisie just moments ago - hey where have my little fur balls gone?

{stage}  Curtain starts closing and "Newt’s ghost" not seeming to "disappear".




Filed under: — @jphoganorg @ 9:13 am

Once upon a time in lands less e-virulent.

Thirteen then "the lucky numbered" — "the fortunate counted."

Drawn and drafted, and the British booted and boarded away, sullen, and resalted.

How currents so, with new currencies, ap and those now freer more of the terra firma.

Once upon a time in lands wild and wonderful stretching maybe all the way to India?

Mexican’s gold?   Fool’s gold?   Drawn, and, quartered?  Re-colonialized - federalist?

Rory now a reckoning, Rory now a waxing box office pre-colonial?  Fence?  No Fence?  Wild, Wild, West or just Catholic Missionary?

Fence?  Who needs a fence?  What is proper property?  What is "civilization" - "civilized"?

It is a beautiful idea to not need or be wanting for a fence, it is so civilized - general Humane. 

Is it though AMERICAN?

How did all the Mad Men and Mad Women of our United States miss the right path/course?

How did the Gods of Madison Avenue miss our quartering and draftings so?

Let the eagles fly!  Let the eagles fly!  Let the eagles fly "centralized" Obamanaughts?

Quarter the quarters,  trash the drafts,  undraw the drawn?

So I am "historical" in Washington DC building history, myself, for as a contractor in DC of needing a Historic District permit/sign-off on permit for new windows, I learned from such tasked, to historical, Steven Colcott (sp? memory here), that I was, to the best of his knowledge the first applicant to present e-altered/photo-computer altered with "cut and paste" digital alterations to show "before and after" for putting two windows on Independence Ave SE at old bricked in doorway for 666 Independence Ave SE and the bricked in window in next old bay.  Yes, I had to mill, myself, these two new windows to match existing double hung, single pane sashes and frames, and, yes I did the masonry and brick work to finish myself as well.

So George Washington did a whole lot more for DC and American attitudes towards fences, as thee of dictates that Washington DC should be a town of connected "townhomes" not like a plantation city of homes with neighbors separated by yards/fields and fences. (learned from visit and tour in DC of Building Museum and exhibit there on historic Washington DC urban.)

So "law and order" now ap a e-discussion necessarily regularly "viral" around "fencing" now a necessary American way?   Can we have some quarters not quartered equal in values/valuation?   Can we have basic property rights trampled freely in a "general Humane" and still defend "general Welfare"? 

How did we lose the big MO of quarters returned to quarters, drawn drafts "federalist"?

How did the Gods of Madison Avenue run down these gates to like "eagle flies Obamanaughts" - only?

Thirteen then the lucky numbered - thirteen then the furtunately counted as "counting"?

Where is a movie for each state now so quartered?

Where is their new tourism pamphlet?

It is like it is their proper "competitive value" not a different "monetary value"?

What is an "Obamanaught"?   One who is both for the policies of un-funding of Clintons and also against the un-policies of Clintons, of Obama, of funding attempting, counter to old Clintons’ "counting"?  

How drawn these drafts, and our values/valuations?

Do you know the diff between e-discussed "general Humane" now of Rory’s drafts drawn around > fence, no fence - continuum?   I don’t!  I do remember our Constitution keyed with "general Welfare" and "secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity…".

It is complicated!  It is complicated like the Pope having spoken to all Catholics around the United States of America pursuing Operation Iraqi Freedom.  It is complicated like looking at a tree but for a looking at the forest it within. 

It is complicated!  And, now the Pope is readying to visit the United Kingdom of British isle - that salted island "across the pond".   Where citizens of the United States of America, Catholic, were not "called" as Catholics to go to Iraq and help provide justice to Muslims in assistance to other Muslims seeking and seemingly deserving such justice, the Brits may not have the excuse and conditions American Catholics also had as Americans.

It is complicated - this "general Humane" now drawn and drafted and seemingly soon to air on HBO under Rory Kennedy’s direction/production.   Where is the "General Welfare" in "general Welfare" is it not there, in, "general Humane"?

Thomas Jefferson still memorialized for encircling us "We the People" in a pledge, common, and carved deep and sharp, as Americans so with:  "I have sworn upon the alter of God eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of men."

It is complicated!  Why didn’t he, so pledging himself and us, not pledge such "hostility" against all tyranny of "minds of men"?

It is complicated!   "General Humane" really "general Humane" but as "general Welfare" so drafted as not confused for placed to start a sentence?

Were British Catholics without a  matching to "American exception" in participating in Operation Iraqi Freedom?

Did British Catholics still have just their precedence "under law" and past post military when of world warring calling them as Americans were to be like American Catholics called as uniquely American, but British - under law and with precedence of history of post war reconstructions and renderings to new drafts drawn for greater justice for more?

Were the "trees" in Operation Iraqi Freedom "forrest" not of Catholics "called" to bring justice to Muslims for other Muslims but as Americans and others called to act, post war, for Iraq as "equally" as they had post WWII and other global conflicts? 

There are British Catholics, other than Tony Blair, right?  And also grateful as Catholics for Pope of not prefacing their involvement, if any, in Iraq as "Catholics" called to save/SAVE "Muslims"?

How did we get to "let the eagle fly" — Obamanaughts when road to re-quartering in new valuations equal but unique with new drafts drawn still fifty equal loosely affiliated states?

"The fortunate counted."???

"The fortunately counted."???

Law and order - anyone?  everyone? 

How writ? 

And the "general Welfare" now like "general Humane" - drafted > quartered/limited - for all? 



Filed under: — @jphoganorg @ 9:20 am

How long did the Bolsheviks stay "Bolsheviks" after no longer "Bolsheviks"?

Oh, poor Lispeth, so disillusioned.

Oh, Ja Ja Binks, such a Gunga Din.

"’Why is my District death-rate low?’ Said Binks of Hezabad."

Chicago, Chicago, Chicago?  How, did you get by with a Governor only needing "two hours a day to do his job"?   Are you as proud of your "Chicago Way" as President Obama its best known current pracitioner, other than maybe Rahm Emanuel?  When President Obama said he wanted to run a personality based governance how did we miss the "Chicago Way" personality as "dominant"?

Where are the Nubians?   Where is General Bangs?

When it comes down to health-care and reform what to make of "commitment" and "pledge(s)"?  What to make of calls to code of honor like:  Cross my heart - hope to die?

When it comes down to reducing health-care costs what to make of pledges of "honor" with "commitment" crossed in promised fidelity to truth?

When not genetic heart conditions but blockages if looked at "morally" do appear a "X" mark across ones heart parts and "suburbs"/"highway infrastructure"?   Do you treat if spots of blockage actually seem to fall under specific "pressure points" such touches when asked to demostrate how the "cross their heart" when so pledging fidelity or asking for believeability?   President Clinton’s records are going to be as available soon as everyone else’s, right?   That would be too strange to be true, right?

Who was Binks?  Why was Lispeth so disillusioned with British colonialism?

And now "green" machines past Al Gore, global alarmist so scare mongering such that children across the world thought their parents of killing polar bears with each and every new gallon of gas purchased for their machines?  And, now past Al Gore injecting extreme market subjectifying and global subjectivity such that we got the over $4.00 gasoline costs he needed to mechanize his "new machines" era?

How much "Chicago!" is too much Chicago even for Chicago?

How long did they stay "Chicago" once "Chicago" now longer even right for Chicago?

When our White House goes with "you provide the pictures and I provide the war" like, what then is their for The Fourth Estate but to chase "transparency" and "democracy"?

What was it candidate McCain waxed upon Dems war posturing to "Afghanistan a war of necessity…"?   >>> "Targets du jure?"?   or was it "War du jure?"?  Wait, one of those was mine, not McCain’s.  

"We are all jelly donuts."?

Remarkable, when you look for "fidelity" and "pledges" to of honor and of simple truthfulness, what one may find.  Remarkable when you look for the treasured "X" marking spot of "honor" and "fidelity" pledging, that even on 9/11 anniversary you can learn something new.

Was it the machine?   Was it just a lone actor?  A lone director/producer Michael Moore?  How is it that today most people take his dramatization of Bush on 9/11 and his scene editing to presenting President Bush interupted by Andrew Card while reading to elementary school students as presented, so it seems, as the first President Bush heard that day/morning of any planes flying into buildings in America?   How is it that until the ninth anniversary much machine politicing still carried that "understanding" and pushed many to over-look that history recorded Karl Rove of having informed President Bush of first plane striking World Trade Tower BEFORE President Bush ever entered classroom that morning.

So Al Gore needed $4.00 plus per gallon gas in order to have a chance to bring in the rise of his "new machines" and now "Chicago!"  "Chicago!" "Chicago!" blame machine still simple in personality to playing the BLAME GAME. 

How much "Chicago!" is too much "Chicago" even for Chicago?   And, again how is it that Governor Blagojevich was, as I heard feed of him saying:  "I was able to do my job in just two hours of each day."  (paraphrased from memory)  

Chicago?  Was there no more centralized and socialist effecting that he could have done for you each day?



Filed under: — @jphoganorg @ 5:58 pm

A polar bear enters stage left:  A polar bear enters chin down looking dehydrated and sad:

>Seems no more than rubber bullets and/or isolation at play.

>Seems odd, just odd this polar bear entering from stage left.

(Polar bear doesn’t speak)

(No real guns seem responsible for all the hype – wondering about the possible dehydration.)

The stage?  What, you want a stage?  Who do you think you are - Al Gore?

Polar bear keeps walking, you can see Russia in the back ground, visibility is good.

(Polar bear doesn’t realize it is 2010 and a mid-term election season.)

(Polar bear also doesn’t seem to understand combat - human style, naturally.)

Left is trying to cheer polar bear for entering stage left and are claiming him/her a "friend of Bill" - FOB.   Left is already understood for trying to move back to before Gore.

(Polar bear doesn’t realize "Hillary" trying to silence the guns hero style like GUNS OF NAVARONE dramatization of Battle of Leros, but only with hollywood hype, like.)

Left is now mired, mucky - mucky, torn between two competing histories, and especially that around the Clintons’ legacy around FOB (Friends of Bill).  Left needs a hero.

Polar bear still moving, sad, and looking dehydrated, no Democrats moving forward with "empowerment" or a bottle of water, or a song.   Dems starting to worry as polar bear keeps going right.

>Gladly no one even has rubber bullets loaded nor extra Kool Aid.  Polar bear not looking as sad anymore - still moving right.  Was it something President Obama said?  Was it due to a new centralized solution effected in Washington, by committee?  Did the polar bear just stop smelling Democrats?

So what if GUNS OF NAVARONE was fiction?  You get that Blumenthal was a big FOB, yes?  You get that "Hillary" is trying to play more hands from the FOB deck even though "personality based" centralization governance by President Obama is counter to the "empowerment" attitude of the nineties around Clintons?  Oh, you like the "hype" punditry offering comity to the LAST CHANCE FOR PEACE - Hillary entrance?

A polar bear enters stage from right, and Democrats start to smile again - seems they think polar bear can only be heading left.

(Polar bear doesn’t speak - well…?  Seems to communicate, some how - something.)

(Polar bears seem to start battling.  Dems don’t see it as love.)

>Seems interesting and that no rubber bullets seem needed, even.

>Seems hopeful as "battling" bears move left - hopeful for the Dems, bears seem indifferent.

Left seeing no blood, start cheering both bears, especially for seeming to head left and so most certainly big FOBs.   Al Gore, who?   What a fear monger.  All that talk of polar bears all soon to die that may have driven gas prices over four dollars a gallon as like a carbon guilt tax, with his subjective scare mongering - best to sneak back to "Bill" and his friends, even if "Hillary" now trying to play from such deck, and counter too to "empowerment" and "decentralization" that worked so well in the 90s.

Quiet, would you - this is my story, please just sit back down.  Yes the nineties was maybe more a success of Republicans than of FOB (Friends of Bill) science and analysis.  Yes the nineties that worked with a dot-com boom was obviously just "happenstance" and not "inspired or created, or saved" by Bill.  Yes, so much of the good news that came to our cities with the decentralization in "community policing" programs and the much championed by Republicans "welfare to workfare"  was arguably "happenstance" "Bill and Hillary" got too much credit for.  Please just take your seat, please.

Polar bears, still with Russia in the back ground look "together" and "happy under the sun" — Dems can smell them, and, so it is likely polar bears "up-wind" and not able to smell them.

>Seems no longer odd.

>Seems one bear was wanting after the other, and seem "safe." 

Polar bears start heading right.

Yes, Dems start to fret.

Yes, polar bears seem oblivious to the contradictions around LAST CHANCE FOR PEACE heroic "Hillary" effecting so also of the hypocracy steppin’ out around Democrats towards mid-terms.   Yes, very few seem to understand how they can be for "empowerment" and "empowerment zones" and the decentralization that was key to "community policing" and also be now for President Obama attempt to run a centralized "personality" based governance with redistribution key.

Well, yes "The Guns of Blumenthal" may need some explanation, past "FOB" ties and "rubber bullets" punditry.   See I first heard the "served in combat" Vietnam service lie back during the Clitnons’ years, when he front and center a "close friend" of "Bill" and "Hillary".  See, I realized such "lie" that someone pointed out to me meant an end to my efforts in Connecticut around helping write for more "clean"  positive change. 

Polar bear that entered from left no longer seems sad, probably wasn’t dehydrated.


Filed under: — @jphoganorg @ 9:39 am

Single file please, SINGLE FILE! now!


>She is not a nurse - she is a patient.

Sure she may be now "nursing" a "peace initiative" but see - she should be doing such for America’s south western "border" states instead.  Just maddening.

>She is one of our "most difficult" cases.

"Last chance for peace…"???   >>> See what I mean?

You should see here as "Queen Rodham"!   Still almost as monotone and quite similar but maddening itself in a completely other un-American way.   God bless America!!!

>She is not a queen - she is not a nurse - she is a patient.

Please, stay in single file, you will get your medication(s) shortly.

>How she came to us is a long story – you may need to visit the mens ward in the wing to the east to see "King Blythe III" - patient "Bill".

>Oh, you want to hear the story?   Well, if you wait until we get all the meds distributed and those back to their "corners" that require such, I can spare an hour for a brief synopsis.

>Oh, you only have fifteen minutes?  Hmmm.  I can try to do story justice, I guess.  They may need me to help with lunch, anyways.

Back to your chairs everyone.  PLEASE!

>How much do you remember about the nineties?  Do you remember the early ninties and the Persian Gulf War being necessary to liberate Kuwait?  Do you remember the Iraq-Iran wars that cost near a million lives and mostly Shia lives?   Did you consider Saddam was largely of sending Iraqi Shia off to kill Irani Shia and that America under Republicans had little choice but to become complicit some for such was the era of United States in struggles to thwart a global spreading of Soviet Socialism?  Have you yet asked yourself, about Saddam Hussein and his "state of mind" – Why did Saddam Hussein think he would be able or allowed to keep Kuwait?

>Ok, so you remember enough to attempt some "justification" within fifteen minutes, now ten-ish.

Queen Rodham, please return to your seat, and checkers game, please!  You know you like it better than knitting, and well you are almost ready to beat that poor, innocent "unmentionable".

>So much for that!  With only a few minutes of your time left it best we just jump straight to the year 2010, and November.   See, it must have been too much of a con to continue any longer, both President William Jefferson Clinton and Madam Secretary of State Mrs. William Jefferson Clinton had burned all their bridges, so to speak – their cons could not maintain themselves any longer, so we here think.

>It is quite amazing the stories you can garner here!

>It just have been too much for them to have played the sincere ingrates full participants in playing a hard partisan political blame game against the entire Bush family - the Bushes that had been so kind for them for so long.   Their conscience must have caught up with them, so we here think.  Their political back stabbing became, finally, too much even for them - even for them when their cons stopped maintaining themselves and the world started looking at the "Clintons’ eight years" as the much more "logical" and "guilty" root of problems facing President Obama.

What is that Queen Rodham?   You beat the "unmentionable" - you beat her bad?  Well - good for you.

>Just maddening, I tell you.

>Well, with us now only to a minute or two of your time still available today let me try to figure out what else needs to be added.  Of course > the Clintons’ economics, luckily without "Hillary-care" that "universal coverage" that really wasn’t "universal" and quite rude to those not American for being "universal" but them not. > Well, even Wall Street caught on to the Clintons’ selfish political needs to spend more time in 90s lining up "Hillary" for "President Hillary" inevitability that they didn’t look closely enough as with compromised motives they took out at least a trillion too much from federal spending and such now best considered as not just another trillion removed "too quickly".   They "turned off the tap" of necessary spending in so many ways their con(s) just started falling apart around all of us, so we here think.

>Have a good day.  God bless America.

>Yes, it really is amazing the stories you can hear here.  Live and learn.



Filed under: — @jphoganorg @ 7:35 pm

Well this is a BLOG after all.

Today is the ninth anniversary of the eve of 9/11 - aka: September 10, 2010.

What are we missing that may be right in front of us, right in front of our eyes, present front and center to our ears?

Dear young President Obama has fallen onto a list so low in my esteem that near only George Stephanopoulus so resides.

There are some words I try to avoid, especially when earned. I had to turn off President Obama’s press conference today just half way through.

And now with evening news showing his closing remarks I know I did what I needed.

Did he just arrive on our planet? Such would explain his limited conceptual around political "inheritance".

Has he forgotten? What was that "tomorrow is a wonderful opportunity…" for him?

Should we talk about "inheritances" outside his blame Bush… - take from the uber-rich… - that tends to belong more to states and local government taxation arms?

How did he come today to talk about American - Islam relations so as if Kuwait invasion and Desert Storm never happened and like with him the first president to ever administer to help Muslims?   What ever happened to the positive images of Bush "friendship" with Saudi royal family members and with air of friendship, much Muslim?

Well, this is a blog after all and I am still of wondering on my 60 mile bike ride yesterday and if it actually is now the bicyle ride of - most hills climbed in a day - since back in 1984 ride from New Haven to Berkshires with full panniers, then the second year so touring such route.   I didn’t look before I took off to ride into Stratford and then up through Trumbull and Stepney and Monroe to Newtown and then south along the Housitonic through Oxford and Derby back then to Milford.  I didn’t think I had picked a route to heights of 700+ feet above my residence near sea level but then I did set out to look at a hill someone said was at least two miles long and so from routing to finding its peak from the other side.  Such riding doesn’t "stimulate" the economy much for I stayed off my touring bike enough years since 1982 purchase for it still to be paying for itself and now with parts from atleast twelve different part stores.  I would need a new bike and its current "marketing" support to be out stimulating the economy.  I do hope your bikes are still holding up.  I do my own maintenance, you?

Well, that said:  Now back to Obama and "inheritances" on this the eve of his day declaring "a wonderful opportunity for…" him to talk about Islam - American relations as if he just landed on our planet and is the first president to ever brave such he seems to be quite dramatic about:   So tomorrow is the day better than any that reminds us what the "inheritance" the Clintons left President Bush was/is.

But back to Noah and his ark built to save species from extinction >> Buttercup’s Ark? 

Buttercup’s Ark???   Surely "don’t ask, don’t tell" controversy rests necessarily upon its own keel?  What is the name, best, for an ark where room for only one of each sex in each species isn’t the issue?

Yes this is a blog and with a sole blogger who turns any channel near immediately upon noticing a broadcast including George Stephanopoulus - for I still think that no one is getting enough of any story from him and maybe less useful "historical relevance." 

So Noah didn’t have room or luxury to address other than survival of species.  So the story goes, right?  Surely others built their own maybe "Buttercup’s Ark" just to see to living another day, and being a proud generation, right?  Was there really only one ark during the flood?

Maybe it was President Obama’s avoiding that whole "9/11 is the inheritance the Clintons left President Bush" more than that claiming around the whole "Spain’s green stats" that his economics were about like doing all he can to grow the economy and create jobs.  But?  But? But, Mr. President you do remember that when you started towards "green economy" it was clear that such approach, even less ambitious by Spain, did lead to at least two jobs lost for every "green job" created?

How do "front-line" deciders get past the "don’t ask - don’t tell" issues around survival of the species and next gens that force tasking around who takes point may effect?

Please offer other ark names and hero captain surnames here:______________________




Filed under: — @jphoganorg @ 4:22 pm

How telling is it that Barack Hussein Obama in one of his books, and likely even such book into its second edition was of letting it read with a character beat near:  I got to get out of this place… to more in his words like:  if I only had power what I could do… I got to get out of this community organizing?

So B. H. Obama let it stand as his beat that he kept having to beat it out, and out then again, and again, and again still with:  if I only had power what I could do…  woops, now done with Harvard Law School, woops, now what do I do…

So B. H. O. did beat it again and again like:  I got to get out of this place – if only I had power what I could do that could keep me from being here having to actually do real work for change.

Have you yet discussed both sides of this problema?

Have you considered that most trade unions have serious "apprenticeship" rules to prevent one from rising to skills mastered full certification while still mostly unskilled and impatient?

Have you considered that Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton has similar "gaps" in certifications to achievement of current rankling?   Have you considered that she is both qualified for her time as First Lady but also not qualified for such time?  That claiming what she did then as qualification confuses so many no with her doing the opposite, often?

That brings us now to Tea Party relevance, maybe more than yet expected.

But first some humor:   Why shouldn’t Americans elected a First Couple to our office of the president that is a coupling of two lawyers?   Because one is always more the Devil’s Advocate. 

Did that work?   Does it rate as humor with humor always having "some" truth within?

So now President Barack Hussein Obama is again like: if only I had power what I could do…?  

And, now slowly realizing that not even the president has the power to avoid the hard work that kept him leaving and changing, and leaving and changing seemingly climbing fast to where that mysterious real power must reside?

Well more about these "Devil’s Advocates" seems our young United States of America and its Constitution could do with a new amendment specific to such concerns around "Devil’s Advocacy".   Seems even electing a lawyer a current member of bar(s) is a problem all by itself enough to justify a new amendment.

And, now slowly realizing that one lawyer elected president on topped "worse" by two lawyers married and "two-fer" in First Couple.  

See, to be a member of a bar is to be kept to professional pride of not being trained to live and practice judging "right" from "wrong".

See, to be a member of a bar, even just as one elected president as a lawyer conjurs up considerations that maybe an amendment needed to make law of land than lawyers can be elected president but that upon swearing of oath of office such is with a surrendering of bar associating.   Better to have a president not still of professional pride to not judge right from wrong.

See, to be a member of a bar, even without consideration that with a First Couple of united lawyers one naturally is likely always more the Devil’s advocate,  it may be Amendment worthy that it writ such that a president not limited to professional pride that also conjurs to a daily and hourly rendering of arguements as well against each issue as arguable for specifics in each and every issue.

Depends what definition you give "two-fer" is?   Where is my "Devil’s Advocate"?

See the problema that could justify a new amendment just to be a formal writ that lawyers should surrender their professional bar associating and that any spouse also a lawyer should so too?

And so President Obama today reminded us of his own personal history and story.

Amend?  Amend?

I am pretty certain my mention of Obama book fits with the same book that spoke to how he carefully chose his friends when he settled in New York City, after the seeming "toughest night" of his life that first night sleeping with his luggage in the alley because he hadn’t made sufficient arrangements to get into his new apartment.   You know that book where he wrote proudly of choosing the "Marxist Professors… punk rock poets … and neocolonialists" as his friends.

This column really supposed to be only about how amending that a "lawyer" should not be sworn in, if elected, without surrendering "lawyer" professional pride of not of trained to judge "right" from "wrong" while staying ready and proud to argue both sides of every issue equally well, as far as natural ability, honed, allows. 

But, well, it does seem that we have learned not even our presidency comes with the power to just willy nilly take from some and redistribute to others, at least without the hard and trying work of "justifying" and "selling".

For arguments sake:  It seems fair though in pursuing further discussion of these points that the Clintons and their "two-fer" provide enough justification and "cause" such that leaving young President Obama and First Lady Michelle more alone and free, an option, maybe worth considering.


Filed under: — @jphoganorg @ 8:19 am

Is it today, still of Dems just playing the BIG TEASE?

Is it yesterday and yet tomorrow that hot seat of John McCain more the train and track fully laid and testable?


Have the Democrats gone soft, and taken economy with them?


Is it like HYPERION by Keats left to two and a half books?   Are the Dems just not going the distance?   Was Keats wise in HYPERION left without an expected additional half of a third book, for "hyper" in "K-E-A-T-S" beat could only be left maybe martyr chasing "hyper"?


So most of world and near all Democrats expected Al Gore to have become the elected President in 2000, and not as a former "cheerleader" like Bush but more a former war-time photo journalist.

Mush, mush, mush!  That is some bone these Dems have thrown the Republicans of 90s.

War beat?  Afghanistan as "Obama’s war of choice"?  Afghanistan as "President Al Gore’s" stolen moments/pix/photo-ops?

Where is the martyr, where is the martyr, where is the martyr "Hillary"?

Mush, mush, mush these the "Hillary Crusades"?  Halt!  Stop!  Click, click, click?

I am no student of poetry.   Thank you General Petraeus for setting me to Rudyard Kipling, and so for that library thing that had me loan out Shelley and Keats works at same time.   Keats’ HYPERION, again as me no student of poetry, does seem set as he said "Miltonian" but as well to beat of K-E-A-T-S and so fit to need a "hyper" echo.

I am no student of poetry.   Michael Moore it is amazing how another FARENHEIT 9/11 sort of writes itself, though disappointing in our not having caught "Hillary the Martyr".  Just seems more a Crusade turned "mush" with the expected "martyrdom" turned to "just accept "big tease" slop.  Afghanistan as Al Gore’s "necessary war" and wow! wow! wow! what amazing war photographs?  What a hero he would have been and with "Hillary" not the storied "martyr" but now with Bill of power beyond all imagination, extra-Constitutional and with President Al Gore happy with them.


What happened to First Lady Hillary Clinton’s crusades as an incendiary in Middle East and even the specifically more radicalized regions?  What happened to "Hillary’s" commitment to her cause to force Middle East and especially the Taliban to become more "American" and "American" as she said "American" should be?


Is it all now just "Hillary’s Big Tease" falling in ditch but for more dramatic "martyr" chase whipped "incendiary" by First Lady Hillary Clinton?


Slop this "Hillary" of chasing the "MARTYR" and pulling up "BIG TEASE"?

Slop?  Al Gore better writ to 9/11 plots and "Afghanistan as a necessary war"?  Even though 9/11 more an attack of disgruntled Muslims not content with post Saddam invasion of Kuwait rending of justice upon Saddam Hussein, then in Afghanistan mostly as foreigner on camping trips not of the 75% of Afghans rated as "illiterate" in their own tongue.

Slop that Al Gore was "expected" to become the President after Clintons, and while story of 9/11 attackers long laid with effectings upon United States soil proper set and fed and trained under Clintons?  

Mush that Clinton Administration, while wrapping to "transition" was as well of establishing new "walls of separation" at FBI between intelligence and enforcement branches that later were blamed for not "catching" 9/11 plotters before them chasing other "martyr"?  

Halting that Clintons if Al Gore had been elected would have had extra-Constitutional powers beyond their wildest imagination, and while Senator Hillary became the untouchable sentimental "Ground Zero Senator" as a new national heroine so moved suddenly past all "seniority" obstacles in Senate and normal road blocks in our system of "checks and balances" to such power usually reserved only for martyrs, post mortem?

Not as "incendiary" as Clinton the track a presidency of McCain would have whipped - new Federalist - to an economy not frozen with rash rush bitting at "green" and with more jobs likely saved and many more created in nurturing states’ teams in competition against each other not a bland "assimilation" to a new "big tease" centralism quite near socialism?

What a bone, again, that these Dems through Republicans of 90s, such that now as Clintons’ nineties seem the root source of most of our troubles it must not have been the Republicans of nineties fault for these Dems would have already blamed them, right?

Have the Democrats gone soft, and taken the economy with them?

So what if "Hillary" chase the "MARTYR" and pulled up short for selfish personal political gain leaving her crusading as "slop" just incendiary and inciting to radicals with her imperialism professing just preaching but not directing?

Secretary of State Mrs. William Jefferson Clinton, if you are proud of your past why aren’t you taking the credit?   Madam Secretary, if you are not proud of your past why are you "qualified" for your current office and why aren’t you apologizing? 

Slop?   Click, click, click!   What a picturesque "war of choice" further "Hillary’s Crusades" imperial towards forced women’s rights for all Afghani, but still without Dems professing that Iraqi women deserved equal treatment, by them.



Filed under: — @jphoganorg @ 9:54 pm

I do not want to write tonight, I do not want to blog another column, tonight, yes I do not want to but then I have written so much in different places in past couple days, it is really what I should do.

First:  Yes I consider the question I put out in last column about economy going "turtle" as soon as she announced her candidacy for president to be answered in all midterms this year, to hopefully great detail.

Second:  What a bone these Democrats and their economics have thrown the Republicans of the 90s.   What a bone even thrown to Newt Gingrich now seeming "absolved" by these Dems for any part he and fellow Republicans may have played in the Clintons’ economics now seeming the tainted marrow of Obamanomics.   What a bone to Republicans these near two years of not trying to blame it all on the Republicans of the 90s instead of on Bush.

Third:   Somewhere I blogged recently a question to others like "Clintons have no valor?"  or maybe just "Clintons have no honor?".   Somewhere I was blogging this querie with concerns for new generation interested in writing about politics, so and without above mentioned thoughts about the bone these Dems through Republicans for not blaming the Republicans of the 90s and making excuses for the Clintons.

Fourth:   Wow, was I glad I checked TV listings and found HBO channel rebroadcasting the 2009 25th Rock & Roll Anniversary Concert at Madison Square Garden last night.  Talk about a mix. 

Fifth:   Yes the New York Times op-ed pieces on Operation Iraqi Freedom seem jokish what with the very logic the ‘counter logic’ asserting in a full historical that then therefore it should be that Republicans should be praised and lauded.   Leaving aside how the Obama administration wouldn’t be in such a economic pickle if they hadn’t thrown such a bone to the Republicans of the 90s and Newt G. and, for now, how yes such likely would have necessarily taken Clintons down a few more notches:  New York Times op-ed columns miss the logic in their logic asserting Saddam was working out that in full historical, and not even about above "economics" mostly, for their assertion that Saddam could have continued as a check on Iran alone falls upon the rusty swords of Clintons "no-fly" avoidance.   Logic, theirs, still fits historical nicely to that it was Republicans backing Saddam in struggles around the Cold War and battles against the spread of communism that was the "check" on Iran.   Logic, theirs, still fits as "counter logic" to their own logic for the conclusions around Saddam still with potential to be a useful check on Iran begets the nineties when "no-fly" and United Nations sanctions busy keeping Saddam from being a check on Iran.   Seems Republicans that had been the real check on Iran new Saddam no longer could be a check on Iran and for knowing they were no longer willing to make compromises around him that only the Cold War struggles could justify.

Sixth:   Well if you haven’t read back the past 7-10 columns here blogged - please do so I can be brief now.

Seventh:  Somewhere I blogged as well about Obama being an "anti-capitalist" who wanted an economy of flat line growth without "ups and downs" (winners and losers).  It was likely just a facebook status post, and if you are not on my friends list I invite you to introduce yourself with a friend request to facebook.com/jpeterhogan so maybe you can get some comments and thoughts earlier.  See, it seems football in America is counter to Obama’s flat economy line desires.  It seems so without "winners and losers" spiking and tanking economic moods a reasonable interpretation of Obamanomics must be anti-football with it so messy with "winners" and "losers".   Well Jets play Ravens next Monday night, and since Jets are all about "go green" and restoring New York with FOOTBALL…

Eight:   Yes it is a detail of our post 9/11 history that Senator Hillary Clinton did get the most "political gain" and "political advantage" from events of 9/11 than any other United States politician and especially President Bush, who then had people calling for him to invade Afghanistan instead of just entering Afghanistan with permission to chase foreigners bent on destroying and defeating America.   President Bush even had it more difficult to move forward with much expected harder lines on Iraq and Saddam Hussein towards threatening to fully enforce intent of all sanctions that Clintons made a point for all their eight years to keep upon Saddam Hussein and pass on as part of weak inheritance.  Yes it is a historical and relevant fact that 9/11 helped new Senator Hillary Clinton beat the old boy Senate seniority system usually able to keep junior Senators much more buried.  Yes without 9/11 "Hillary" would not have suddenly taken the global or just national stage with such a complete and emotional makeover, as a "Ground Zero" Senator necessarily spotlighted as a politician all Americans should help and pray for.

Nine:   No!  America didn’t deserve to be attacked on 9/11 though such "radicals" of attack may have thought just.   We may have deserved something and for the "avoidance" and "inaction" of the Clintons’ 90s, but we were not all Democrats, silent to the issues maybe thought justifying.   The United States of America was open to more peaceful expression and discussion even if it was to an dismantling of Clintons’ popularity and governance.  Not sticking to the landing was an unecessary acting, way too radical. 

Ten:  On the Clintons "without valor" or was it "without honor":   Well that is in all the reporting and stories of their crass politicing and Bush bashing with Obama and by themselves even when even the least amount of political gain could be garnered with Bush bashing.   Well, that is hardly valorous of Clintons - Clintons so embraced with unearned friendship and the rare loyalty practiced by Bush family to have been so crass and political in turning on such proffered and regularly extented "friendship" by Bush families.

Note:   Yup,  I am sure there was more I meant to write here tonight, while not wanting to have needed to write, tonight.   Yes it is quite a bone thrown Republicans of 90s that now traps Clintons in their own "failure" hardly yet properly reported.  Who would President Obama have been, so far, if he hadn’t contaminated his administration with such an embrace of such a crass political, and politically cold and calculating "two-fer"/couple?   In the future I may not fill in so as I have tonight the gaps in "commentary" that facebook friends may understand better for "fit" with status and notes posted on facebook.



Filed under: — @jphoganorg @ 8:37 am

Take this morning >  this morning is a good morning not to go visit my old childhood neighborhood > this morning though neighbors are gathering as they do so basically just once a year, in this old neighborhood that had more "Obama for President" and "Change We Can Believe In" signage in 2008 than much else, national-political > this morning that it is a good idea to avoid happening upon old neighbors years since seen that I could again bicycle in ten miles to again gather with > this morning I just want to do near everything to avoid hearing any of them tell me they thought the current economics would not have been the "result" from these long fought for Dem economics.  "Zonker" used to headline this day with many a foot across New Haven, and may still.

Take this economy > Really, are we where the Dems hoped to get us so that "crisis" could justify "new foundation" around "necessary" centralization around nearest to a national  socialism than ever before?   

Take this economy > Why would Republicans have effected such, even just towards 2008, for that would have them then to intentionally trying to lose 2008 elections with them able to be blamed for the bad economy?

Take this economy > If it happened for of Dem Political "meddling" then getting it going again needs entirely different approaches than if it just happened due to two decades of economics since Clintons not able to sustain their optimism and PEACE DIVIDENDS…

Take this economy > If it happened around changes and much positive change unique to our 90s transitioning to a new world of United States of America a sole "superpower" nation and then with politics of nineties not paying enough heed to such "uniqueness" of "responsibility" and "economic factors of change" then - hmmm?

Take lawyers as President > Like Clintons and now Obamas >  They are trained to be most proud in an ability to argue both sides of every issue equally well.  They are trained into a condition becoming near inappropriate to the style of leadership America usually needs.  They are/were trained to find it much more difficult to find the "better" thing to do/say.

Take lawyers as President > Like Clintons more still than Obamas > Professional rights and duties and oaths, even, and "two-fers" depending on "depends what the daily definition, that day of ‘two-fer’ is"…?   And, spousal rights not to incriminate, but weakened by First Lady Hillary, insisting on specific civil service duties as a civil servant in the administration proper, that should, and should for her ‘insistance’ have ‘removed’/'cancelled’ some to many of the traditional spousal protections and even her special "lawyer/lover - client priviledge."  Surely there are still two sides to this argument, right?

Take lawyers as President > And uniquely now the Clintons, specifically > "Hillary" should have been disbarred and in the hot seat with "Bill" during "lying" prosecutions around "Monica Beach"?  Can you argue just one side of this, have you tried both sides?

Take HC > No, not "HC" as "Hillary Clinton" > Health Care with IMAC "NEW" political office of healthcare statistics and records of The White House now to have, eventually, full access to private healthcare and medical records of all Americans of having a doctor > IMAC is like chartered to charge towards statistical analysis to find new ways to cut costs, right?  And, so they say with patient names or social security numbers "public."

Take HC > Yes "Health Care" legislation - with IMAC >  It would be medically and scientifically irresponsible for such statistical analysis of new White House political office of IMAC to not look at "location, location, location" of "conditions."

Take HC > Yes "Health Care"… >  Sold!!!  They will have your personal and private medical records and necessarily in such orders to finding ways to lower costs and stream line better/healthier "behavior"?   Sold!!!  They will have, in new White House political office of IMAC for scientific statistical analysis, and such, and such, and such… and a necessary "medical" and "scientific" need to know and study "location" and maybe down to specific "block" or "addresses".

SNL???  Is this "funny" that liberal dems are of bringing in such a bold invasion of rights to privacy?   Is this "funny"  David Letterman?  Jay Leno?  Woopie?  Chris Rock?

Not a "who done it"?  REALLY?  They will with new "efficiencies" seeking with access in new White House political office for medical statistical considerations of all relevant facts of "conditions" and "healthy conditions" be looking for "commonalities" like even "region" and "region down to most specific useful causal understanding."

So, have you considered both sides of these arguments and issues, yet?   Now that the law, say, is "passed" will you now be able to "understand it" as promised by Speaker Pelosi?

So, what now with all your urine, stool, and blood tests and q&a data on "use" and "frequency of use" skew their "regional statistics" while looking for "epidemic" level concerns or a say "understanding" of a more quiet and mellow "grouping" that keeps showing up just in some specific Democrat neighborhoods and oddly with usually a much smaller "location" of similar "uniqueness" showing up in microcosms usually with a downtown or "near ‘hood" "thumbtack"?

Have you yet even tried to labor both sides of these arguments and issues?  

Why did "Hillary’s" entrance into run for presidency "turtle" our economy?



Filed under: — @jphoganorg @ 12:47 pm

Tomorrow is Labor Day, or maybe it is Labor Day today.

Seems the problem is still the problem J. Edgar Hoover faced after having worked with liberal Democrats so many years, and so closely, so closely almost a "plumber" himself, and, so so those many years maybe with a realization that the "liberal lawyers" had an advantage in court that could protect his snooping for them but not protect him if he dared do the same for Nixon.

Tom Delay for President?  

President Bush honored so many Republicans of much ‘positive change’ during nineties by playing the simpleton (being a timely simpleton) more of "stay their course" of it was their course that needed preservation and crediting?

Tom Delay for President?

President Obama, don’t you agree that this makes sense since Democrats must have been going after those they needed and wanted out of the way the most?

Yikes, what a September Surprise!  now with Tom Delay out in the open/clear to revive the Republican pride of 90’s positive change thought stolen for Clintons with attacks on Delay?

Most already see Nixon of "if the President says it is legal…"  of now maybe the "new foundation" of President Barack Hussein Obama administration, and as "good".

Most already see President Obama administration no slackers themselves in looking into private emails and medical records and everything else their new "IMAC" political White House office of Americans’ medical records and with urine and stool and blood samples now such a secret warrant away from biased party hacks, and others nobel in charge, to Constitution and "We the People" people.

But, how many have read the history/biography around J. Edgar Hoover of that book I read whose title and author I am not at this moment remembering — How many know of J. Edgar Hoover as FBI director refusing to do for Nixon what Nixon felt just, still in then going past Hoover’s fear of the above mentioned "liberal Dem lawyers" he knew too well?  How many get that this book and its author I believe quoted such FBI director of telling readers that basically Hoover was >refusing to do for Nixon what he had done regularly for Dems and Kennedys?

They got the wrong man?  Only cold molasses pours more slowly?



Filed under: — @jphoganorg @ 9:48 am

Did you miss all the irony, the massive irony in this weeks Dem manuever?

Where is the "Sitting Buddha"?

Are these war-mongers among us dressed in sheep’s clothes?  Des Dems?

How did border issues so "current" and "cutting edge-political" get side lined by run of the mill daily Palestinian border relative calmness — as NEWS!!! ?

Surely an out-break of "Mini Becks" was more likely "news" for this weeks manufacturing of "priorities" than bring so many Middle East leaders to grandeur and splendor and opulence of White House pomp and circumstance, and bring all these without any "audacity"?




But?  But, where was the "AUDACITY!"  where was just the "audacity"?  Why were the two leaders in contest for leadership if Iraq also present?  Now that would be "cutting edge-political." 

Why did these few Middle East leader acquiesce to such "cheap theater"?  Why did they venture to such stage of excess splendor instead of more "dramatic" say internet cafe’s of Middle East near such disputed regions?

How could any of them agreed to meet this week with another with the current leadership of Iraq, now "post-Saddam" threats of regular additional DOOM?

Like we didn’t have enough labor issues to deal with this weekend without "cheap theater" to maybe actually towards "socialism" mixed in and messianic?



It has to be more "messianic" — it can only be more Obama-messianic!!

"Too polarizing" Hillary still smarting from having cut "two-fer" popularity in half while trying to get back her favorite "public housing"!

"Divider, not uniter" Obama, as days have worn on, so, so, so as our polls show!

Can only be the MESSIANIC thing — cannot possibly expertise in "uniting."

Arizona is really far higher a "border" priority for even just "economics" of our times before even getting to adding Health care reforms and borders worries.

But really why all this necessarily "cheap theater" with Middle East leaders awash in our taxpayer provided luxuries without the two leaders in contest for leadership and uniting of Iraq?   Others too?   Why all this irony of appearance of making "peace not war" that is more encouraging in its hard partisan near a controversial mid-term election enough in their own region to still be seen more as "making war" not "making peace"?

Carbon hi-mod may help us go further on less energy, and so more efficiently.  Isn’t a heavier bike better for ‘weight loss’ per mile?  How much "green" is too much "green" for our times – best to stick with "world is flat" thinking for a while longer?


I can say CONFLICT OF INTERESTS -  can you?



Filed under: — @jphoganorg @ 2:09 pm

First though some housekeeping:  I love my SRAM, I love my SRAM 8 speed "replacement" bicycle chain.   Oh, it fits proudly on my 1982ish Panasonic DX4000 with Shimano 600ex full grupo, and french "Competition" touring rims on the Japanese 600 hubs.  The saddle, now that new tires, new Panaracer Pasella 1 1/8 x 27 road tires, became called for, this saddle that was a aftermarket upgrade more tuned for my specific riding attitude,  this very saddle that though the "RACING III" model was to be used mostly for touring or long training rides,  yes this very saddle I had to mail order back in 80’s from Palo Alto Cycles near Sunnyvale, near Stanford.  They do not make Avocet saddles any more, and while I consider newer tech, while old tech still ramped, I do so loving my new SRAM chain and the company story all since earlier days of my cycling as primary hobbie.

Well, that said:  There she goes again,  there Madam Secretary of State Mrs. William Jefferson Clinton,  the Mrs. to Presidents Clintons’ "two-fer" that could have been President William Blythe III and First Lady "Hillary" Blythe.  That probably would have stopped them before they got started, right?  Well there "Hillary" goes again in another desparate attempt to save "Bill’s" legacy and reputation and now Global Foundation’s relevance.

Well those two matters taken care of:  And well with "Hillary" much also with "Obama" of missing their times and the destiny they both seemed called to:

No more pants math, but, well "Hillary" and "Obama" are still missing their’s this greatest calling of our times and its rare economics and opportunities for real change to a better economic foundation for all American legal residents — "Hillary" and "Obama" seems set heading in the wrong way, economically, and while Middle East can make its own news like she apart of some hours today, quite well with new media and internet and much without her, and the complications her involvement add.

President Obama, I get that it is ironic that you got elected, and that even "Hillary" could have been elected for such a rare opportunity for foundational economic change good for all future economics of the United States of America.

Additional cycling note, while I think much of this winter to be full of wondering on upgrading to a new road bike, to take me to three bikes, what with my Cannondale 850 from 1988 product line still going and also soon maybe ready for tire upgrade and change to higher psi tires with less resistance now available for more road than off road efficiency.   I may though, when and if I "upgrade" to many technological improvement found now on current and vast product lines, still consider building a whole bike from separate orders of separate parts.   Today was the day, the day so before I went out and road for over five hours in 90 plus degree CT weather, remarkable for likely the first day I could say I had riden over 1,000 miles so far for 2010.

"Hillary" certainly contaminates the Middle East process and with it a reasonable discussion point to look at her for misplaced motives, more to helping Clintons foundations than Obama administering.

So it is a union job for President Obama, that could have been "Hillary’s fate" as well.

It is no "cheap theater" to look at irony that President Obama is faced with the greatest good he could do the United States economics for now with "crisis of valuation" matured and mostly past we find ourselves now best to call our president to take advantage of such across America and bully, if needed, all unions into wage reductions across all perks and details in employment packages and benefits.   This is no call for unions to lower there agreed wages just for greater profits for "Management" but a rare opportunity for American to become more competitive in global economy.

Much has become cheaper, and more is likely to become cheaper as a result and with long term growth likely quite modest compared to recent decades of major techno advances. 

Therefore,  America needs our President to incourage or bully all union leaders and members to across the board adjustments in line with new lower "valuation" as the best path forward and now with it a very rare opportunity for even with lower wage agreements that may need readjustment of mortgages as part of deal and revaluation of major assets as a one time "adjustment" — that with even agreeing to lower wage packages they will remain in same "economic class" and with same purchasing power and status.

Patriotic marketing note:  Yes I rode a "Japanese" bicycle with Japanese components but did mix it up and dream the dream of a resurgence in American cycling equipment pride.  Especially all those years thinking of Rhode Gear equipment/water bottle cage, and Cannondale panniers and handle bar bag, and quite while riding on my Specialized Touring Turbo tires of same now much less used and supplied for rim size that also were "folding tires."   It wasn’t until a handful of years ago, maybe 2007 while getting back into cycling while still in DC area that I bought my clip-in pedals for both bikes and cycling clip-in sneakers and moved, finally past "toe-clips and straps"   Shout out to Performance cycles for years of being in the cycling business and now of the labels on most of my cycling clothing now in use at least a hundred miles from any of your locations. 

Another patriotic note around cycling:  Timeline has it, if remember correctly, here while making sure to mention Eric Heiden, that I didn’t buy this bike without having known who Eric Heiden the Olympic Skater turn pro cyclist was, in early 80s, and didn’t pick out the above mentioned "Racing III" saddle without remembering the Columbus Day Bike Race hosted by New Haven and within a block of my home that Eric Heiden was headlining with his change to cycling, and with my not just meeting him but having record of such for wonderful photo(s) he posed for that I had my younger brother captured within.

I guess while mentioning "international" around this bike story I should, in all fairness add that I was an off and on squash player while then primarily in tennis and swimming, and with often daily consideration of my squash racket the Slazenger DIPLOMAT.



Filed under: — @jphoganorg @ 12:57 pm

A little "back to basics" woven now into fabric of weeks news:

>Your bus is going down the street with ten riders and no blacks sitting in the back.

>At your next stop two people get off the bus, both from the back of the bus, and at stop nearest the ice cream store.  One elderly rider gets on and with senior citizen discount.

>For the next three stops no riders signal for a stop and no one seems to be standing near enough the bus stops to actually "be waiting."

>Then three riders exit that have been sitting apart from each other and seemingly "not together" and five new riders board, seemingly in two "clicks" at this the nearest stop for the public library.

>You pass by three churches and another house of worship before anyone seems to signal for you to stop either for them to board or for them to exit.

>By now three riders all black seem to have chosen among the many empty seats to sit at the back of the bus, but two together and one seemingly "solo."

>Wow, school is out!  Twenty plus white youths all looking much the same but of coed group seem impatiently waiting at next stop.

>> So, and well it seems a puzzle now for two others usually wait at this time, but seem more prone to detention, but next stop at least three usually unboard, and with a bounce in their steps, and a tune in their head, so near your stop nearest athletic fields, for seniors.

>>>And now the hard reality - the quizicle to civic awareness, as has been asked for as long as I can remember:   WHAT COLOR ARE THE BUS DRIVER’S PANTS?


And, now some real math and judgemental awareness:  How much can President Bush be at fault for spending this supposed 1 trillion on war mostly in Iraq, and "quilty" and "shunned" for not having spent that much, that much that was deficit spending largely, and, so much as "should have been spent in United States"?  First we need to subtract how much of this was spent in Afghanistan - Obama’s JUST WAR - and then subtract a large amount of this spending for Iraq that Obama fits more to Afghanistan as his JUST WAR but that was the deficit spending needed to reverse the slide of our military from the gross and irresponsible unfunding and underfunding during Clintons’ eight years.

And, so with that "subtracted" from "Bush’s Trillion" presented by President Obama as like of all spending outside of United States territory proper of such "trillion" now how much of such was actually in state spending for troop salaries and support staff expenses as well as equipment and state side logistics?

And, now how do we "discount" or "value" the commentary asserting by President Obama that this money should have been spent near entirely only on social causes within United States territories, proper?  

How to "value" such "spending" assertion while President embraces Clintons, both, and while trying to only blame Bush administration, yet while history recorded Clintons in their eight years of leading us to such spending, such spending Obama presents as more proper use of such deficit spending yet of Clintons then saying it wasn’t necessary and that unfunding and underfunding of such domestic programs what Americans should embrace?  So this "hypothetical" "other spending/budgeting" also of  Clintons and Dems during Bush’s years of trying to keep him from reversing their unfunding of such "programs"/"line items"?

And, should the Iraq Operational budget get a discounting for Democrats largely of reversing seemingly then reasonable arrangements to see United States start getting some "payments"/"credits" from Iraq oil sales while operations on going?

How much should be subtracted as well from Obama’s "Trillion" spent that he seems to be saying shouldn’t have been spent and for what the costs of maintaining sanctions and "no-fly" zones and such of operational costs that Bush likely would have had to keep up for all eight years, just to be safe? 

And, how much now would we be having to spend now just to give "bite" to sanctions for others like Iran, if Bush hadn’t put sufficient "bite" into sanction on Saddam Hussein with such "Trillion"?


Do you remember, such seeming math quiz, of old? 

Did you remember? 

Did you remember that "You are the bus driver"?

Did someone say "pants"?  


Filed under: — @jphoganorg @ 4:35 am

"After two years of warfare, the major causes of the war had disappeared.  Neither side had a reason to continue or a chance of gaining a decisive success that would compel their opponents to cede territory or advantageous peace terms.  As a result of this stalemate, the two countries signed the TREATY OF GHENT on December 24, 1814.  News of the peace treaty took two months to reach the U.S.,  during which fighting continued.  In this interim, the Americans defeated a British invasion army in the Battle of New Orleans, with American forces’ sustaining 71 casualties compared to 2,000 British.  This great victory gave the Americans their final war goal, restoration of national honour.  The war had the effect of uniting the peoples of the U.S. as well as the people of Canada, and opened a long era of peaceful relations between the United States and the British Empire."  (Wikipedia, War of 1812)

Today as well is a good day to GOOGLE  "More Poetry, Please" column by Thomas Friedman, in New York Times sometime in past year.   Sorry, but my blogged column that took on Mr. Friedman’s commentary, in poem form, is of the 227 columns hidden at www.jphogan.org from first year’s content, hidden until further notice.

And, "news of the peace treaty took two months to reach U.S."?  What is there still to learn about/from New Orleans?  What was it about the British that had them back to warring in America so soon after losing its colonies?

Was it all Napoleon’s fault? 

Well it seems President Obama was poorly served by the "spell check"/"editing" duty of his State Department what with, again, a seeming calling like Friedman’s MORE POETRY, PLEASE, as so many left to wondering now on the "momentum" of the Taliban commenting. 

>> "Within Afghanistan, I’ve ordered the deployment of additional troops who – under the command of General Petraeus – are fighting to break the Taliban’s momentum."<<

Ummm?  Taliban’s "momentum"?  Interesting concept.  "Taliban’s momentum"???  But, wait they haven’t had "mo" since Clintons’ eight years, right?  The "home team" of "momentum" or just Taliban going about their daily lives with a growing occupation force now more of "neocolonialism" and president’s fondness for "punk rock poetry"?

Taliban "momentum" still of ruff shoes/boots - climbing and traversing rocky mountain trails in regions not just with plumbing and running water but even without roads to speak of, and usually of "horsepower" still of "one".

President Obama, though really seems to have the Republicans on the ropes - what with the spending on Iraq so high and with Clintons not solely responsible for "surpluses" as much about diverting federal funding from such "spending" now "necessary" or at least far more important and worthwhile than such funds of massive amounts, was it spent on Iraq freedom, or just as implied (falsely?) "in Iraq"?

Surely Bush didn’t drop a trillion of our dollars in just one nation of about 25 million people, but instead did budget rebuilding of our armed forces and support structures with spending "on" Iraq but here in America, and, so of "change" to Clintons’ and Republicans PEACE DIVIDENDS before their time reckless surpluses, right?

But, still it seems to have cost so much more, and now in greater hindsight with "sanctions with bite" again a necessary policy posturing quite too much more than it should have if only the need for "bite" was pushed by Clintons on Saddam Hussein within their unexpected first term administering so soon after Bush was at 87% popularity for prudent prosecution of Saddam Hussein.   It would have cost less and gone more smoothly if we had returned to Iraq after just giving Saddam Hussein at most three years to fully comply, right? 

And, we would have had greater cooperation and trust from Iraqi Shia and Kurds for the full eight years of "abandonment" by Clintons, that chided at Al Qaeda for seeming maybe an insufficient prosecuting of Saddam Hussein post his Kuwait invasion?

So.  It cost so much because the Clintons let the Taliban get some "Mo" and as well for they in their intimate "two-fer" did let Iraq fester, all their eight years? 

Really, there are a lot of parallels between Iraq and New Orleans, and with both of action maybe better pursued before a "surge" effecting.