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?

Comments »

No comments yet.

Leave a comment

Publication may require admin approval; please come back later to view your comment.