hogan
Categories:

Archives:
Meta:
August 2018
S M T W T F S
« Jun    
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728293031  
06/27/12
SOCK IT TO ME?
Filed under: POLITICS, IRAQ, OBAMACARE, #CGI, #SUSPECT, WAR ON WOMEN, #MORALS, #PUTIN ESSAYS, #SOCIALISM SQUIBS
Posted by: J. P. Hogan @ 8:21 am

What is it said about “plans” and “war” - about “a plan” as soon as an actual war starts?

President Obama as Candidate Barack Hussein Obama - BHO - planned to be a new JFK, right?

And now how while BHO is seeming more pasty and unprepared for prime time You Tube video streams?

Looking at 2012 complexity:

> Are we to define “working class” as those of class as per governance that have work that pays taxes - and so “working class” is those busy as the reported less than fifty percent that pay taxes into a …? When President Obama says - “get back to work” is he speaking to the “rich” as his “working class” as it is they he needs working to afford his own “work”?

> So bike and pedestrian projects are “local” - pedestrian bridges and bike paths are best kept or made “local” projects and as near to “public/private” partnerships as economically reasonable as alternative and “better” commuting routes to businesses - businesses especially local fitness centers and eating establishments?

> More on the survival of our Constitution: #SCOTUS today with Arizona case set up ACA ruling seriously well >> from today’s decision and especially siding by Chief Justice Roberts we have established practically that if you can’t use race or “legal” status in Arizona then it cannot then be used by doctors under any Obamacare even for “family” or “genetic” factors and that Obama wants our borders open so that any can have American care since well after today they don’t have to carry proof of legal presence.

> Query: Re: Arizona dec - Conservative Justices could so support such for by supporting such they reinforce deciding against Obamacare - ACA - for having no limiting principles like with Arizona an example since of no power to establish whom therefore is “legal” and limited to Obamacare???

> Anyone have the numbers for this yet?: Is Obama running for re-election hoping for votes from recently unemployed or is he running for votes for millions grateful for a near three year paid vacation?  Are women for Obama grateful and willing to vote for him for having thinned down the jobs market so much they have him as an excuse to stay at home with more “me time” - or are they considering re-electing him thinking he knows what work they are better to be doing and believable with promises of finding non “me time” work for women?

> If I were moderating a Presidential Debate tonight I would have or hope for a question about immigration and self deportation of these economic times as it seems since immigration wasn’t worked out and fixed before ACA - Obamacare hysterics our economy may not start growing the new jobs in a new growth economy than some that haven’t self deported are maybe still waiting for, and so that we are to ask and get an answer about whether it is possible that until immigration is fixed the jobs won’t come back and that if a new immigration or re-immigrate legally system can be worked out it may be smarter and more self serving to self deport just so so much that Dems did backwards can be fixed and to unleash a new attractive growth economy.

Hmmm? Anyone - anyone with the last name Romney or Obama?

> Related to “SOVEREIGN STATE” powers and rights we have actually inseparable and relative philosophically at least - as least socially speaking comparatively - that therefore when a state is sovereign whom is “legal” is a particular particular - say for if Obamacare isn’t overturned if the United States of America is to have enough armed forces in another country another “sovereign state” and enough force to “OCCUPY” such state regardless of the stated state of such forces as if not combat though combat ready - hmmm?  It follows whom is “legal” or a “subject” critical for by the very lack of a complete philosophy of governance with sufficient checks and balances of limiting principles then therefore it stands that if the United States or another state is to have enough armed forces in another sovereign state but so that then morally all the people of that sovereign state have a right to expect for the duration of effective “OCCUPATION” the same full rights to medical coverage and American medical care.  So it seems #SCOTUS - how can it not be so based on the inadequate limits herefore so far writ?

> The easiest way I have of remembering the troop size considered by some to have been an Iraq OCCUPATION force of United States of American stand up citizens is to remember than during the primary race between junior Senator Clinton and junior Senator Obama in just Massachusetts’ primary the gap between them that primary election day was about 150,000 - about the same number of US troops at highest level of deployed whence.

> With efforts to ACA - Obamacare was much about a federal IMAC clearinghouse of all legal citizens and their personal medical files and medical histories and maybe as well to required annual or semi-annual check-ups #SCOTUS to the Thursday a wonder where we may be to hearing as well how IMAC so conceived as a Big Brother centralized computer database system to cost efficiencies isn’t to our Government to illegal search and seizure of incriminating personal information like urine - stool - and blood tests for all the substances legal and illegal then most a political and/or health concern. I mean didn’t Obamacare get set up to allow the new Big Brother Centralized Main Frame IMAC concept to be to comparing and contrasting details of individual citizen’s current and past medical facts without warrants otherwise to such and so to cost analysis maybe not just down to zip code but maybe per street to an objectivity not based on name that would at least be allowed to legally publish sharable analytics with “detail” down to at least a side of a particular street within a particular zip code or subset per zip-code?

> So as per #SCOTUS is it Thursday we may be reading lines about how in America and these United States you cannot claim “Under God” that an individual citizen’s soul or sexuality is free and locally set asunder in rights and yet have their body and its “jurisdiction” as per “their” body be to “their” body being of a soulless national body physically of national jurisdiction and Supreme Powers and even to a control of its arms via dictates adapted may as well to limit control of arms as per our thought preserved Second Amendment rights? #commonsense It is Thursday we may have to wonder how our nation can separate our body from our freedoms and our soul?

> Wow - aren’t we to the Clintons are suspect as towards all this and much of their 8 now vacuous of waste - time lost on a wrong path - to a post Constitutional era that isn’t?

> There is a big diff between how CGI was set up and how it is being run - Mr C claimed he would not use it to partisan or political powers - and yet really he is and is regularly - most regularly to an irregular especially when of his annual mandatory meeting of world leaders then able to be in town also for the meeting of the over-shadowed so United
Nations???

> With this (Major Lawsuit Claims Dodd-Frank Is Unconstitutional) as long as some of ACA - Obamacare Unconstitutional - we have that Clinton Global Initiative as operating can also be challenge and separation of powers concerns and especially since it is operating while Mrs C is Madam Sec Mrs. C. — they thought they had the Constitution beat as no longer relevant and tried to do how much???  And Mrs. C our top officer responsible for saying whether Mr. C is operating completely within the intent of our protections and for saying whether anyone should be even looking at Mr. C so?

> And so yes - Operation Iraqi Freedom was needed and with us in the right to be about it so.  Yes Bush admin though of a good feeling that it was right was not all that great at selling us on it as right - that said, the time to sell it rightly and timely was the first term of the Clintons’ admin thought maybe easiest if actually the second term of President George H. W. Bush.  Don’t know if I have written this all out fully yet but I have addressed it much now many places for a long while and in some of columns of just past few years.

Hmmm?  Yes it was right but not sold well - and I had confidence that Bush 43 had a feeling that it was right though he maybe could have sold it better even though the best time to sell it and only easy time was likely during what was the Clintons’ first term.

> And so still yes - Operation Iraqi Freedom was right and necessary and yet not to cause a peoples movement across the Middle East but so that we didn’t get trapped morally and hypocritically on the wrong side of it - and maybe as Saddam Hussein had considered or hoped he could trap us and as of a thinking that he had a way to keep Kuwait after invading it.  Hmmm?  Yeh a re-election of the Clintons would have been maybe America’s biggest ever mistake too - a return of the Clintons with suggestions that they were wise of a Grand Strategy needing continuity even though there was an actual ‘GRAND’ strategy - and nor a left entrance or exit plan for dealing with Iraq to leave to their successor whom ever - and so no real alternative by the Clintons and only a weak supposition of “bite” by Clintons for sanctions even just for human rights violations.

> Well, that was an interesting line in Foreign Affairs by Brooking xprts to find today about how Arab Spring was an unexpected curve ball to Pres O and therefore necessarily also former FLOTUS Madam Sec Mrs. C.  I thought they had been trying to take credit for it and not have their favorite institute of xprts say it was a ‘CURVE BALL’ unexpected.  See this is where it gets very interesting - if you have been to un-hid {maybe again “hidden”}commentary/blog page at jphogan.org as enticed you likely saw a composition mentioning a 2007ish conversation I had with Serbian Ambassador Ivan Vujacic about Hillary and Operation Iraqi Freedom - about why even though if AEI had “top Republicans” seeming already defeated that they were so early saying he should expect Hillary to be the next US President - - about Operation Iraqi Freedom while I told him Hillary shouldn’t or couldn’t win while then adapting for the only time anyone asked me to explain and defend Operation Iraqi Freedom and Bush admin as per Serbia and me to telling him my personal thoughts and how such was with needing that Clintons were not elected and to that way a way that Serbia would be able to be best positioned for the type of peoples movement I had a hunch had to be allowed for - sort of like the Arab Spring.  Seems my advice is admitable now as right then for how we did the necessary thing with Operation Iraqi Freedom even if it wasn’t sold as well as it could have been.

Hmmm? I guess Obama’s favorite xprts aren’t also going with:  Neither Obama nor Clinton were prepared for such.

Hmmm?  Did you hear the one about Obama policies expert Vladimir Putin and how he suggested that if President Obama didn’t beat his addiction to Soviet socialism he could cause the United States to fall apart into six separate regional realms?  @jphoganorg of http://jphogan.org/ & …

Comments are closed.