6/12/2011

EMBRACE THE TWITTER

Filed under: — @jphoganorg @ 9:33 am

President Barack Hussein Obama, whose father once was a cook for British troops, did recently speak where only the Pope, Queen Elizabeth and Nelson Mandela opted to accept a rarely afforded offer of venue - Westminster Hall.

I am not sure that was 140 characters or less - we shouldn’t though let Representative from Queens, NY ruin Twitter for everyone.

For Pelosi Weiner much a political problem about SOP, protocol, jurisdictions or districts.  For Obama Weiner raises coup concerns of Clinton Democrats not toting his own party priorities.  For Clinton Weiner stirs a THEOCRACY OF CLINTON threat to our Constitution and separations - For Bill Clinton Weiner so as acting to HIGH PRIEST BILL.  For Clinton Weiner Hillary has a problem with she and her women being objectified and willy nilly subjugated, at least domestically.

For Twitter many are grateful - but where were the "tweeting" deserved and earned by President PBO at Westminster Hall and not he of a carpe diem for "reparations" - at least? 

If there were "tweets" about Twitter abuse by Weiner that covered concerns that a "marriage" officiated by Bill Clinton is naturally a "marriage" that is "not" a "marriage" I personally missed them.

So Queens Weiner used Twitter in inappropriate and non-traditional political ways to reach out and stir constituents of his comrades, instead of just his own.  Pelosi’s Weiner is a new technological political problem that old frank mail barriers and checks better protected and served - he seems to have prefered "twids" (twitter IDs) that were known constituents of other comrades, though maybe thought his as of the "church" of Bill.

And from Westminster Hall some tweeted - many tweeted but not it seems about an American first black President that is half Irish having asked for reparations at least for the Irish – it remains an American issue so as to whether enslaved blacks of such an empires history actually had a better living standard than many early Irish Americans.

Now maybe this Weiner story will expand to issues of "Twitter Tag" games with this Weiner having passed on "twids" (again TWID = twitter ID) to his comrades of such jurisdictions and political districts - "retweeted" like as old "phone tag" of our standard operating practices of Washington representation historically has for "business" so that people would be passed to their sworn representative and largely ignored otherwise by other say "comrades" of Weiner.

Was there inadequate "tweeting" coverage of unusual Westminster Hall platform afforded our first black President of our United States of America during our TEA PARTY "REVOLUTIONARY" REVIVAL DAYS?  He used such to celebrate that his father had been a mere cook for British "colonialist" or "neo-colonialist" forces and got worked up some about his own current neo-colonialism and his hosts support about such.  He seemed to have fed insufficient material for proper tweets on issues of slavery and reparations and even just issues as well about "reparations" maybe deserved by Irish.

He may have asked for "Bill" to officiate a marriage for Queen’s Weiner that would be of the "church" of Bill as still of "is" not "is" and so a "marriage" as not a "marriage." 

The real story here, beyond just the additional political mess of crossing his comrades’ politics and standard operating processes is quite what "expectations" to "civil" or "godless" a "marriage" officiated by President Bill Clinton is of, officially, and politically.  Was it meant to a "Twitter" political activism and even coupish against President Obama in a loyalty to Clintons and their "beliefs" and "worshipping" of each other as still above and superior to President Barack Hussein Obama?  Why are most of seeming inappropriate Twitter activities of political stirrings beyond his own jurisdictions?

In less than 140 characters most can now tweet sufficiently that the Democrat Party is a party divided with too many bosses and too few real solutions or feasible or workable solutions.

I don’t have any clue why President Barack Hussein Obama would have asked for or just accepted the opportunity to speak from Westminster Hall at least without using it with "brotherhood" to speak to "reparations."  I don’t have any clue why a President of these times and conflicts and with such domestically with his own party so divided would have welcomed such complications to arise from the rarity of venue offered with Westminster Hall planning - and don’t know if he specifically asked for such even though England as united with a Church of England offers other complications for one so individually of pulpit siezing regularly to advance his "personality" based new evangelism to a new "interfaith" religiosity.

Sure you may need multiple tweets and a thread of them to sufficiently communicate the Constitutional propositions being adulterated by Democrats these days and especially that about our First Amendment Constitutionality that former Constitutional Law Professor "Barry" Obama is most dividing around our "establisment clause." 

See our First Amendment allows that there be no law passed regarding an "establishment" about "religion" but so that one that wanted/wants to be a new "MESSIAH" is sort of hopefully exempted from since their activism logically would not necessarily be an "establishment" of "religion" unless it had been successful to being a new "religion" with all their efforts at "establishment" and such not needing mere laws passed while so of a new evangelizing around efforts until such time of "character" and "personality."

You could simply tweet that our 1st Amendment allows that a "second coming" may occur and so beyond our laws capability or jurisdiction and yet need a second tweet to address Queen’s Weiner or "Church of Obama" or yet a continued processing to a "Church of Clintons" unless, that is, that any "marriage" officiated by "Bill" Clinton is specifically not a "new interfaith union" superseding all existing religions nor a simple "civil" and "godless" union of a "marriage" not a "marriage" and of union celebration of "is" not "is" Clintonisms.

Twitter use by Queen’s Weiner is specifically short and confusing - Queen’s use here about Twitter where used as "Queen’s Weiner" is specifically to the jurisdiction and political district of Queen’s New York. 

How Clintons’ Weiner got to abuse of "trespassing" - morally speaking - as of their "officiating" - is an issue beyond expected political use for Twitter, right? 

Representative Anthony Weiner, evidentially speaking, seems to have been more interested in people not from his district - at least via Twitter - "All politics is local" just wasn’t doing it for one obviously of a "church" or "godlessness" of Clintons?

What does his "embrace" of Twitter really say about "marriage" and his "marriage" by Clinton of a thought Jew and a known Muslim wife? 

His marriage was meant to be a larger political statement than his Twitter embracing - it must have been, right?