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.

Comments »

No comments yet.

Leave a comment

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