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.