Filed under: — @jphoganorg @ 5:16 pm

Most of the time, here, with these mostly quite "first drafts" I am to a chosing of a "title" first and then to a sticking with the title.  Today I have no idea how to title thoughts, yet.

And, now I have figured out a way to title an untitled.

And, now I have figured out that is what I was/am to a writting to - "untitle the titled?" - "title the untitled?"

Quite an oddity and yet an "oddity - in character, for Clintons" could still be said to be such that I may have heard the best speach from the Senate floor by no other than Senator Hillary Clinton as speaches about President Washington’s wisdom and prudence to leaving presidency for to mark and key our United States of America away from fiefdoms and royalty.

Entusiastic!  To the point!  And classic in "Clintonesque" to the opposite point in its erudition.

So, so, so, odd.

I wish I now knew a link for such from days so long ago that Madam Secretary Mrs. William Jefferson Clinton was still Senator Clinton and President Clinton was still of as much an expectation from her to subjugate herself and her career to himself and his, as again pressed yet now from on high in erudite as President Clinton from The White House podium.  Such speach on wisdoms of Washington given maybe in memory of another may still be the best yet from the floor of our Senate yet on points not writ to clever "counter-point" oddity so "Clintonesque."

So, so, so odd!   A Clinton of high oratory best of and for the opposite of their practice and hope(s).

How the "envy" had to be tempered so, how the "greed" and "power" reaching "covered up"?

President Obama cannot "pull a Clinton" - now way - no how!

President Obama shouldn’t "pull a Clinton" - now way - no how!

To be titled.

To be Titled?

President Clinton for "smaller government better government" still a contradictory useful "Clintonesque" oddity?

What would Perry Mason think?  What would Perry Mason argue?

What would Citizen Kane think!  What would Orson Welles ink/print?

What will Big Sister Hillary say?   What did George Orwell think?

Take: SMALLER GOVERNMENT BETTER as CLINTON SPEAK:   A lesson from the MIRACLE ON 34TH STREET:  For a Clinton to say such is like a Macy’s Santa saying "Go to Gimbles…" but not?

Sure Clintons played Santa Claus for eight years but really where was the "morality" and "prudence" in such?  Sure Clintons said "smaller government better" but wasn’t such only as long as it would be "better for them" and to "holding of power" past Washingtons’ prudence and sense?

Now still basically still in "first draft":  To Be Titled:

Yes "Washingtons’ prudence and sense" for where would we all be without Martha Washington.

Oh, Madam Secretary Mrs. William Jefferson Clinton should be absolutely furious.

Oh, Gloria Steinem can speak for herself - have to imagine she should be as furious.

Oh, President Obama wasn’t that some clever politicing so parading "Bill" Clinton now past HILLARY FOR PRESIDENT - CLINTON TWO-FER to like expectation that HILLARY JUST AS CAPABLE.

Yes "Washingtons’ prudence and sense."

Oh, but the oddity of erudition to "Clintonesque"?

"Smaller government better government"  like "shop at Gimbles" - but from Corporate Macy’s?

If you are going to write you should be dedicated and even to attempting such as a "pursuit of happiness."

To be titled?

What can feminists say now, now with President Clinton called for a parading in humility before The White House Press Corp, such a slam to Hillary Rodham Clinton, Secretary of State?

What can feminists say now of "Hillary" but like ’still willing to subjugate herself and still put her husbands career and needs before her own.’? 

What can feminists say now, again with "Bill" up in "Hillary’s" career and "space" meant "her turn"?  Why did he do it?  How could he do it?  Didn’t he agree it was her turn?

Such another "Clintonesque" oddity, though now far less successful in the counter-point erudite to an oration less successful in alternate "or"?  

A definition of "is" now less "triangulatable"?

And so to conclude:  "Go big or go home" as secret to the rise and fall of Clintons for the selling to "go big" sold on emotions of electorate and global markets to political vultures hooked for such brought a big promise to a "big fall"?  

And so to conclude:  "Go big or go home" so Clintonesque in the "go big" and "go big the otherway simultaneously" and again and again simultaneously against modern economic science and general prudence?  To where is the fall we "stayed tune" for - it should be huge?

And so to conclude:   I have no idea why or how the Jets could have let Danny Woodhead go.

And so to conclude:   President Obama shouldn’t attempt a "Clinton" nor a "1984" for the charm initiative of Clintons was all so unrealistic "go big" - "go big…" as mentioned and with "smaller government better…" as a clever way of such career politicians as Clintons to be base in agreeing for it would conclude "them better" while their method and practice all one sided but "Clintonesque" in contradictory better not contrary administering, as the one side not one side of an issue but just "their side" in their selfish hoarding and power grabbing.

We have seen the coming of the Clintons,  we have seen it as the coming of Obama.

We haven’t seen their promises balanced though "balanced" and to irresponsible "popular" "go big" also to surplus such that near half of their two trillion cut in a mere few years was spending necessary and not to be undone, at least if you buy into the "morality" or "need" if any of Obama priorities.

So, so, so odd!  

So many classic Clinton moments effected to the opposite of presented somehow and someway, selfish even in "smaller government" a embrace practicle simply to "better if we are still in power and gain powers."

So, so, so odd, and sorry I don’t have a link to the maybe best speach I have yet heard from our Senate floor on the subject here too to why Clintons should be better respecting Washingtons’ prudence and sense of state, and especially after 90s when such an "example" made more appropriate for the globe, yet lacking, alas, for the Clintons and their reaching and reaching.

Maybe we haven’t all been robbed of the "great fall" we expected from all the Clinton hyping and hyping, and hyping even higher.  

That podium parading, a first indicator?

If Madam Secretary of State Mrs. William Jefferson Clinton even going to use "Hillary" any more?   Has she finally escaped her "cover" of "feminism" now and can stop trying to hide her true self and grit to a willing and wilful subjugation to her man and for her man, first and last?

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton?

Comments »

No comments yet.

Leave a comment

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