4/29/2011

CLINTONS NEED THE FRENCH

Filed under: — @jphoganorg @ 9:25 am

Their "preparation Hillary" has worn off - a rash is about their own efforts to "set asunder."

They are still one, oddly one a "two-fer" and supposedly a divided union or at lease one divisible.

The set to max the pomp to pompous around the circumstances they deemed necessary to distract Americans from common sense and sensibilities of Martha and George and old those until such much more to an willing honoring of Washington(s).  They may have thought they had found an effective work around our Constitutional prohibition from grants of Title/titling by working to an essence of "titled" secured, but not "official."

Clintons must have spent years figuring out their strategies to even break from English and their standards, to be and attempt to be even further more necessarily French and Descartean.

It is quite elementary my dear blogites - a 24/7 "holding" cannot legally be set asunder by another 24/7 "holding" - The Clintons are as much still ONE in marriage, legally, for all souls as "Will" and "Kate" of Cambridge now are.  They are English and subjects some of the Church of England - we do use much of their language though not their juridictions and jurisprudence here abouts.

The Clintons are quite scandalous.  If only they had been able in essence to effect the pompous and circumstantial necessary to their needed Descartean "separation" of a "two-fer" mind from its united soul and physicality.  The needed to succeed at least to a minor essence of "crowning" for themselves to get their desired and long sweated "work around" of our "Martha" and "Geroge" sensibilities.  They needed their hopes to become "essentially" titled to be hidden by distractions and illusions of patriotism.

What is "Holy Matrimony" - to the Clintons?  What is "let no one set asunder" as about all "holding"?

Quite right, bloke, yee — The Brits don’t have our Constitution nor its 22nd Amendment limiting.

"Hillary for President" was a corrupt and illegal and un-American quite corporate corruption hidden with clever Democratic attempts at aggrandizements to a working and better left pedestrian Washington.

The Clintons being Clintons were best left to prove to us all first, as they have, that we wouldn’t have missed anything if we had from day one enforced the 22nd Amendment in the spirit of the days it was writ and ratified so then of great and growing concerns seemingly still likely of days of President Franklin Delano Roosevelt last terms really having been the years, necessarily of Eleanor and their daughter as the able minds allowed to assume helm of our ship of state, our State vessel.   It was so writ, our 22nd Amendment by a new Republican Congress nearly of as large an electoral sweep as our current Congress, and with concern for all issues about a First Couple and transference of power necessarily a part of term limiting amending.

So they nearly worked us counter to our history with their pompous circumstantial "lawyers in love" constructs with the un-American "Hillary for President" (or "Bill for President" if "Hillary" had actually been a true feminist and force Bill to submission to her long known desires to become President and he then to being the second helping romanced). 

So they nearly worked us into their necessarily French and Descartean separation constructs not at all seeming a part of now partially witnessed "Will" and "Kate" ceremonies. 

The Clintons have, with their near domination of President Obama, now shown us we wouldn’t have missed much and likely have been better off not to have ever bought into their new Frenchy "camelot" and their "preparations Hillary" have worn off.

They have a Whitehaven and maybe still a Chappaqua - don’t know - last I read they were trying to move up to something more courtly also near New York City.   No Buckingham for Clintons now, and now with a Buckingham instructive and soulful – Let no one set asunder not even American elective standards/norms.

The French may even protest and laugh at Clintons for not getting the French – like how can a married couple sworn to a marrital holy union attempt to consider themselves and their 24/7 marrital soul holding and physical holding when manageable attempt to posit that their 24/7 sworn holding wouldn’t be set asunder by another 24/7 prohibition enabled on them Constitutionally against further "holding" of such an also soulful charge and 24/7 "holding" duty?

Yes, the pomp and ceremony needed to secure the pompous and circumstantial the Clintons long fought towards for themselves to as near a "titling" as The United States of America allows has been thwarted.  The Clintons are caught still sworn to their marrital "holding" and oaths to "let no one set asunder" that also means American elective politics that is not legally allowed to differentiate their union as one into the convenient Descartean "two-fer" they purport(ed).   Really our American Presidency is long historic as a charge and duty to a 24/7 soulful and mindful "holding" as an embodiment of such - an prohibition from future holding as in our 22nd Amendment does necessarily raise that spouses are both "elected" when a married candidate is elected.

The Clintonesque may actually be an absurd Descartean - I apologize now to those all or also some French.   An election of another of Clintons’ "two-fer" a united "one" in marriage would set asunder the marriage vows about "holding" around "to have and to hold…" for a prohibition from further "holding" already enabled by bulwarks of our democracy and Constitution.   One cannot now be "elected" again to a holding/embodiment still our tradition without such legally setting asunder the other spouses marriage rights to "have and to hold."  It is definitely absurd, this Clintonesque, where it fails to work around their sworn "holding" oaths such that it couldn’t and wouldn’t be legal for a spouse otherwise writ as legal to such return to office of our home office establishment within THE WHITE HOUSE then to "hold" the other as such is an office of 24/7 embodiment/holding now Constitutionally off limits.

"Hillary for President" was a corrupt and illegal/Unconstitutional power grab also selfish and un-American.  "Hillary" as a member of another administrations cabinet and so in our lines of succession to a possible other "work around" to a prohibited further "holding" of office of President still seems quite against the spirit of our bulwark of a law - our 22nd Amendment - so of an era specifically of concerns about FDR and Eleanor and even their daughter as maybe our then actual only able and fit "leader"/"holder of office."

Yes the 22nd Amendment forbids further holding by election and a "two-fer" is still a legal union with oaths sworn to protect "having" and "holding" and such usually with "let no one set asunder" – The Clintons attempted a suggestion that their legal minds were separate and completely objective and not barred by their united souls and bodies/physics.  What nonsense.  Even if so, or possible, or just granted to all members of the bars, such if possible is such quite to being a natural disqualifier along "character" and "personality" standard concerns.

What nonsense!  What nonsense all this in Clintonesque so about them asking us to overlook how elective politics would set asunder their sworn oaths to let no one "set asunder" their marrital "holding" and "having."   We want our First Couple to have soul - we expect our President to have and hold his office/charge viscerally 24/7 - there would be no time allowed for any further marrital "holding" such that their marriage vows and commitments would be "set asunder" by another election or charge within our line of succession.

Swear to one - be one - please!

Please don’t also try to be a Descartean or Clintonesque "two-fer" construct positing and impossible and unnatural "objectivity" at least if you are an American.

At least now they themselves have proven there was nothing special or necessary that we now would be missing - at least they have been given the space and even around their extra-Constitutional "Bill" as either AMBASSADOR TO THE WORLD or as accepting of titling as PRESIDENT OF THE WORLD BILL CLINTON.   It is much easier now that they have proved they only had their same basic legal attitudes and character deficiencies/objectivity again and so that President Obama at least had more to offer.

Viva le French!  Beware still the pretenders.  I may be more "French" than my name suggests - I have never cared much for Descartean logic though.