Filed under: — @jphoganorg @ 9:33 am

So "Bill" has gone rogue.

President Clinton has done more to deminish and defeat himself than the "new media" of "blogging" can quite take credit for, to a blogger.

We have "HIGH CABINET DRAMA"  afoot and main stream media a foul for avoidance and inaction in their charges to duty to cover.

And now the Tea Parties are of the same "power" as Clintons were in their much surprising and uncharacteristic and unexpected rise to 1992 presidential decision.

Do you know the story of the rise of DIFFERENT STROKES television drama - do you know it rose from my playing "I have a black cousin" while trying to win a heart and a date?  Not only did I play proudly "I have a black cousin" I ran scared when I won such heart that had been cold and cold with "but maybe I want to date a black boy".  (I really dispise the whole >."< or ">." grammar option for "rules" seem to call for both for dramatic punctuating.)  Don’t mess with my cousin unless you too know how to teach and fight - are you an expert in kick-boxing and related martial arts or maybe a member of his Cambridge/Boston area dojo?

I wasn’t then running from the "race" issue and not now.   I am of even remembering post "sparking" so while in my mid to early teens then and working in community input around such airing and with "two adopted sons" would be better and healthier for dramatization that seemed to have a mass market, and seemed then timely.

I was in my mid-teens and didn’t see it coming - how was I to prepare for "win" including hearing here parents say "you will have to move in with us" and me then thinking they meant I would have to move out of my parents house a couple blocks away.  Boy I ran, that wasn’t what I thought I was trying to and more of wondering while running why it wasn’t more "she will have to move in with me."

The world of art and entertainment in a wonderful world of community sensitivity and maybe not of needing public funding as much as big government liberals argue.

The Clintons, both of them, are more now who they were before they entered presidential race for 1992.  Both Clintons are back to themselves more themselves and their closer crowd more of "sense of governance by polls" than an "instinct for leadership" and "leadership".   Both Clintons are now more of such again of more trying to make the times fit their ambitions and style than of "leadership" to fit ideas, and hard decidings, for their times.

Do you know who the first elected "Federalist" Governor of Connecticut is/was?

Do you know my New Haven Public High School of 1983 commencement from such was the Wilbur Cross Governors? 

Do you know that Governor Matthew Griswold was the second Governor of Connecticut, as Connecticut a state in our newly formed union, the loose union of states of our constituting to Constitution of our United States of America?

And why do we now not protest our having just one vote in the United Nations and not fifty votes of a loose union like European Union states?

Yes the Clintons are back to being who they truely are and now of sticking President Obama with their old "economic team" and the same "failures" they in their "two-fer" most likely would have been of effecting, and of effecting near the same identical ways.

The DIFFERENT STROKES story, may have come to mind today because "Bill" was doing the ridiculous of slamming "witchcraft" in the era of Harry Potter economy, or because Jim Furyk made "Fluff" a million dollars.

The DIFFERENT STROKES story, may have come back to mind for "Bill" appeared with AG Blumenthal just the other day at my old high school, my old inner city high school where I lived with this daily, and very quietly. 

The DIFFERENT STROKES story, did though come from my running away, not from "race" for she was a blond that looked some bit like the actress cast, and did so come from hearing her parents "misinterpret" my emotions with "he wants different strokes."  I must have been too young for such literature, some - since I thought they were telling me I would have to physically move completely into their home.

So the 22nd Amendment is having its existence to likely embrace spouses in term limiting now being justified by "Bill’s" behavior better than any lawyer not disbarred could.  His acting out, to just a full explanation to such as a full "necessary" justification, to language of 22nd Amendment and its specific similarity to common marriage vows, especially around use of "holding" is now a clearer dramatization than any of my columns and blogs these past few years may yet have accomplished.

And now with "Bill" of more about "race" than just "it not about sex" for now "Hillary" must be smarting for her past as a feminist, now trapped for not of having tried to become president before Bill and so now of it "Bill" not "Hillary" packed and near wrapped up in Rep. Boehner corrugations. 

Yes "Bill" "it is about sex" while "not being about sex"  and mustn’t "Hillary" be smarting now that she has become the "poster child" for 22nd Amendment as Republican writ meant to protect our loosely affiliated states in their Constitution from Democrats again abusing "elections" as FDR family rumored to have with rumors around Eleanor and daughter actually the effective "president" during last years?

Yes the Clintons lack an "instinct to lead" and have their eight years of "avoidance" and "inaction" now demonstrative and accentuated still by President Obama’s Nobel Peace Prize Acceptance Speech and such specific oration to "dangers" of/from "inaction" and "avoidance".   Clintons are now becoming more known for not even being of the "instinct for leadership" where it does surface in their eight years and thought then theirs.  They are becoming their old selves more each day of "crisis" opportunism and "sense of governing by polls".

Yes the Obamas were sold as the new JFKs.   Yes JFK didn’t worry about polls as like the "first TV President" for Kennedy legacy much more of Kennedy family of working the messaging to create the desired polling.

Yes at the heart of the Clintons unpredicted and unexpected rise in 1992 is still a collection of political writing not theirs >> THE CHARGE OF NEW FEDERALISM.

Yes at the heart of the Clintons uncharacteristic rise for those times of many proclaming "President Bush deserves a second term" and especially Senator Al Gore then of saying such in explanation to his "not running" >> is arguably the same common sense of Americans that solidfies now around federalism with Tea Parties, American, anew.

Yes, looking at 1992 the Republicans looked a "dangerous" choice and a party that a re-elected President Bush might not be able to keep moderated as he had by then to date.

Yes, electing Republicans in 1992 may have had dangers that Bush would have been at a loss to control and with dangers around CHRISTIAN COALITION radicalized beyond "family values" to a seeming movement to claim all credit around United States having won Cold War and Persian Gulf War as specifically a "bragging right" for future puffery belonging just to right wing Christians as an American Christians VICTORY.

These are different times.  And, maybe President Bush if re-elected still had it in him to continue his prudent moderation in Republican messaging.

But, yikes, is a day now passing without "Bill" throwing "Hillary" under his political "bus"?

Comments »

No comments yet.

Leave a comment

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