2/18/2011

MARTHA LIVES!

Filed under: — @jphoganorg @ 10:05 am

George, dear, yes ‘pitty the fool’ that tries to take your recipe as their own and especially for profit - my recipe was shared without a transference of "ownership" and as it was so a recipe "original" to us.

Do you think some day "Americans" still of a United States of America will be about "keep it simple stupid" remarking?  Do you think that the wisdom in our simplicity will be ignored and kneeded as "simple" and "stupid"?

Retirement is treating us just fine George, don’t you think?  And, on that future "stupid" concern do you think we should now act to make our example as first elected couple and "official" and not just a "suggested behavior" such about two term limits?

George, could we craft such into just a single additional sentence into an existence, and if so would we need Jefferson or Hamilton or even Madison or Adams? Obviously we could be to a future with Americans not "citizens" of a United States of America and of a different constituting - will it haunt us if we don’t create a writ to limit a first couple to more than two "electings" as per our wisdom and our example?

Martha, Martha, Martha - where would I be without you, would we even have a country to be so discussing?

Long live Martha!  Long live Martha!  Martha will be remembered or else - or else ‘pitty the fools’!

Yes, George you/we may not have to be royalty to become immortals, ha, ha, ha.  We don’t even have to prevent and outlaw a "touching" or "holding" of us by others.

George, though, could we fit it into just one sentence - our essence and common wisdom - can we in just one sentence even do justice about our ‘holding’ and affections and such to cover the wisdoms about "royalty" touching "holding" preventions?

Yes, Martha, we might and maybe such would be enough to guard and bulster Americans to still of a United States of America and away from becoming too "bookish"!

Oh, George - so we shouldn’t have to write it into law - its absense but with our "example" should be enough?

At least Martha a best place for Americans to start from - and yes ’pitty the fool’ who takes our recipe as there own and especially if to a profit so misappropriating our heartfelt sharing of a recipe original to us and shared only as ours.

George, if such becomes necessary the word "elected" will have to be used as strongly and actively as the word "person" don’t you think? 

Martha, let us hope our example and such as of common wisdom is enough.

Okie dokie George. - have another cookie you?

Yes Martha dear - and yes you are the mother of country - I know not to say "they should have elected you" for they did "elect" you.

Honey, should we at least write about the no holding or touching of royalty practices? 

No Honey.  That shouldn’t be necessary to a an understanding of our ‘holdings’ and ‘touching’!

NOTE:  Years later an eightieth Congress still of so conceived United States of American and such of Americans was to at least one sentence so: "No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President,…"  Martha seemed a little nervous - her/their example may not be enough for "elected" to be judged as important as "person" - George still hoping less is more. George can hear Martha and her concern that people may have forgotten she thought herself also "elected" and proudly through marriage.  Martha still a believer that George was "the office of the President" and she daily to a holding of him and by common acts of "elections" to such as her right and honor to duty.  George defers again to her wisdom and irreplaceablity and of such his duty and honor about her as a co-holder necessary and competent to such.

NOTE:  Pitty the "Democrat" if a more crass example needs be aired.  Pitty those that need it said like "Paul Tsongas knows a wife is also ‘elected’" or even to a more crass "Jonathan Edwards, knows that Americans expect the wife to be also ‘elected’."  Pitty that American who, maybe of a too bookish, is of an oblivion about founding common sensicalities.

Note:  (added a few hours after above original drafting) >>  Our 22nd Amendment could just as well have been writ otherwise more exclusively or "specifically" as "No President shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice,…"  and so rendered usage of "elected" more allowing to a President having a "harem" more than a "spouse."   But we have it as writ "No person…"!  1+1=2 is "just dating!  1x1=1 well that is marriage!