Category Archives: Social Security

A New Red Dawn Over America—Obamacare & the Police Power in Arizona are Upheld—the Constitution again ruled DOA at the Supreme Court (full text of the Supreme Court’s Worst Two Decisions of the Week attached)

Chief Justice John Roberts is rapidly becoming my least favorite U.S. Supreme Court Justice in history.  First, in 2007, the debut innovation of “the Roberts Court” was Bell Atlantic v. Twombly, then a followup kick in the face of freedom under the name of Ashcroft v. Iqbal and now this week (on Monday, June 25, 2012) Arizona v. United States (Arizona v US) and, today Thursday, June 28, 2012, yet another day that will live in infamy: NATIONAL FEDERATION OF INDEPENDENT BUSINESS et al. v. KAREN SEBELIUS, SECRETARY OF HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES (NATIONAL FEDERATION OF INDEPENDENT BUSINESS et al v SEBELIUS SECRETARY OF HEALTH).

It’s been a really bad week for the Constitution and for the American people, and a very good day for  Obama’s flourishing Dictatorship of the Proletariat.  Oh yes, and what a nice present for Hillary Clinton as she celebrates lasting longer as U.S. Secretary of State than any other of the 96 individuals to hold that office—and we were all sure she was just a joke back in the early 1990s when she was pushing a National Health Care System which looked an awful lot like what we’ve got now with Obamacare.

First with regard to Arizona v. US: The expansion of the American Police State seems never-ending, as the late great Strom Thurmond’s States-Rights Democratic Party Platform very accurately predicted in 1948.   The great triumph of the Civil Rights Movement in the United States over the past 64 years is quite simply this: all oppressive acts of government, so long as they are applied equally to White people as well as Blacks, Hispanics, Asians, and all others without Racial, and only with Economic and Political, Prejudice, will be upheld.  But try asserting any constitutional right other than your right to be on an equal footing with all other slaves, and man YOU ARE DEAD MEAT!!!!  States Rights got a minor boost last year when an individual right to sue under the Tenth Amendment was recognized, but this year the 162 year trend towards the complete suppression of State Sovereignty marches forward unabated….

The main issue regarding Arizona’s immigration statutes was whether the individual states of the Union have any right to make more restrictive laws regarding residence and citizenship than the United States as a whole.  Under the expressly anti-States’ Rights 14th Amendment, the Supreme Court said NO.  But, if the Arizona police want to go around harassing people on the highways, they are free to do so, so long as they are willing to say they suspect that every blonde-haired & blue-eyed caucasian must have recently entered illegally from Sweden or Norway perhaps….  The Supreme Court, these days, never seems to miss an opportunity to enhance the power of the police to oppress the population at large.

With regard to the “Obamacare” case, I can only say I’m NOT even as surprised by this result as I was not by the result in the Arizona immigration opinion.  Ever since Franklin D. Roosevelt gave up his plan to “pack” the Supreme Court, there is no infringement on the economic liberty and personal choices of the American people which the Supreme Court finds too trivial to be worthy of Federal Enforcement.  The only comment-worthy deviation from predictions was that Chief Justice John Roberts in this case came up with the novel notion that the U.S. government can tax anything and anyone it wants to for any reason, including non-compliance with a mandatory insurance purchase requirement, and that this punitive tax or purchase choice makes it all “OK.”

Of all the commentary and punditry that came out on Thursday after the decision, two of the most “spot on” that I saw were first) the article describing John Roberts’ “Liberal Apotheosis”:

After Thursday’s Obamacare ruling, Supreme Court Justice John Roberts became a minor deity to some liberals for voting to save Obamacare. But just days before Roberts’ apotheosis, liberals lamented that the “conservative” Supreme Court was taking America down a dangerous path.  (http://news.yahoo.com/obamacare-ruling-liberal-apotheosis-john-roberts-035207618.html)

The “Liberal Apotheosis” of John Roberts?  “Apotheosis” of course, means transformation into a god—and what did the pagan gods of Olympia or Pharaonic Egypt do?  Exactly what any god can do:  A “god” can work Miracles,  first Make and then Bend the all Rules, Change the Natural Order of Things….   I suppose my own religious notions, such as they are, posit an unchanging God defined by the phrase from the old BCP: “as it was in the beginning, it is now and ever shall be, world without end amen” which seems curiously absent from most Episcopal services these days.   I equate God with Nature, and while I believe rather fervently in Evolution, I believe Evolution operates according to certain utterly unchanging rules, such as the laws of thermodynamics, which even the discovery of man’s ability intentionally to split or fuse atoms could never quite change.

And yet the Godlike role of the Supreme Court in making and bending rules seems more than a bit undemocratic.   So that is the second part of the analysis we need to perform today: Was Roberts’ decision to side with Obamacare entirely a matter of political strategy?

 The American Concept of Constitutional Judicial Review predates Chief Justice John Marshall. The Supreme Court’s decision Chisholm v. Georgia 2 U.S. 412 (February 1, 1793)(Chisholm v Georgia, 2 U.S. 419, February 1 1793triggered the (I would now say very unfortunate) move to enact the 11th Amendment during the First Term of the Presidency of George Washington.  But Chief Justice Marshall’s notions of judicial review shaped the Court, much to his cousin Thomas Jefferson’s dismay and disgust.   I recall hearing the story of Marbury v. Madison and judicial review in my Freshman year at Tulane, from Professor Jean Danielson in Political Science H103, where I met my long-time college years best friend John K. Naland, now a long-time veteran of the U.S. State Department.  Professor Danielson explained the political genius of Marbury v. Madison was that it empowered the Court while respecting the political boundaries of the time.  Chief Justice Marshall knew that, as President Adams’ last major appointee, any decision made in favor of the appointment of Adams’ minor “midnight judges” including William Marbury would simply be ignored by the new Democratic-Republican administration of Jefferson (with James Madison as secretary of state and the defendant in the case) as an act of political partisanship on the part of a Federalist appointee favoring Federalist appointees.  On the other hand, to uphold Secretary of State Madison’s power to refuse to honor the appointments made by President Adams would seem like craven capitulation without legal or moral integrity.  So, in a result which no one ever anticipated, Chief Justice John Marshall carefully reasoned and soundly declared the statute authorizing the appointment of Magistrates in the District of Columbia to be an unconstitutional act in excess of Congress’ power under the Constitution—and the role of the U.S. Supreme Court as Constitutional arbiter of the United States was established forever—or, at least, for a long time.

That particular “long time” ended in 1936, which, as a another commentator/pundit on the Obamacare decision pointed out, was the last time in history that the United States Supreme Court overturned a major piece of Congressional legislation as Unconstitutional.    Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s first term as President was unlike anything the United States had ever since, including George Washington’s First Term.   In Washington’s First Term, the constant debate in Congress was whether the Federal Government had power under the Constitution to do much of anything at all.  The spirit was decidedly “conservative” in the sense of cautious, even as a new nation conceived in liberty and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal was being launched as a more formally organized “corporate” type of enterprise (the Articles of Confederation were much more analogous to a “partnership” among the States—with each partner having a nearly full veto power).

During FDR’s First Term, there were also many in Congress who asked whether the Federal Government had the power to do a great many of the things the New Deal proposed to do, from the NRA to the TVA (National Recovery Administration to the Tennessee Valley Authority).  But from 1933-1937, such questions were not asked in a cautious or even skeptical voice regarding what Congress and the Federal government could legitimately do, but in the desperate and panicked voice of people who saw and feared “you are taking our lives, our fortunes, our sacred honor” from us.  Those people sought recourse against the reckless usurpation of Federal Power in the Supreme Court, and in the years 1933-1937, the Supreme Court struck down 29 Congressionally passed statutes signed by the President as part of the New Deal.

Roosevelt’s first hundred days and all that followed provoked an unprecedented clash between the Supreme Court Justices and the “New Deal” alliance of the legislative and executive branches. At Roosevelt’s instigation, Congress in the 1930s enacted a series of laws ostensibly, supposed, aimed at ending the Great Depression and restoring the nation’s economic well-being, but in fact aimed at shoring up the American Elite, especially the Banking system, from the threat of a Communist and/or Fascist revolution analogous to those taking place in Europe at the same time.  Of eight major “program” statutes to come before the Court, only two were upheld. Laws that were struck down included the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1933, the National Industrial Recovery Act of 1933, and the Bituminous Coal Conservation Act of 1935.  The Court came under heavy fire for its decisions, and Roosevelt proposed a controversial plan to increase the size of the Court, presumably to ensure a majority sympathetic to the New Deal.

Shortly after the plan was proposed, the Court defused the issue by upholding a series of revised New Deal laws.  Dominated by economic conservatives, to which group even late 19th/early 20th Century “Progressives” such as Oliver Wendell Holmes were (by comparison, anyhow) the Court threw out numerous laws Congress enacted to protect workers and consumers. The conflicts peaked in 1936. The Court threw out twenty-nine laws during that period, but the last of these was in 1936, when when the court invalidated a federal law that limited work hours and prescribed minimum wages for coal workers.

Everything changed in 1937 when, FDR Proposed the Judicial Procedures Reform Bill of 1937 on March 9 of that year in one of his legendary “Fireside chats” whereby he jumped over the Congress and all Constitutional Separation of Powers and asked the American people directly to endorse and support his programs.  The public reaction was overwhelmingly negative, almost the first time the 33rd President had seen any of his initiatives draw such opposition.  But the Justices of the Supreme Court saw the writing on the wall—mene, mene, tekel upharsin—and when faced with the two major cases challenging Social Security (the ultimate authority and most direct antecedent for Obamacare), the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the most massive fraud ever perpetrated on the American people—the law creating a “Social Security Trust Fund” with the bribed cooperation of the States—into which Social Security Trust Fund not one dime of real money (certainly not one dime of the 14 Trillion dollars paid since 1937 in Social Security Taxes) has ever been paid.

Helvering v. Davis (05-27-1937 Helvering v Davis 301 US 619 57 SCt 904 Jusice Cardozo endorses the SS Trust Fund Fraud) and Steward Machine Company v. Davis (Charles C Steward Mach Co v Davis) thus effectively marked the end of the Supreme Court as an independent branch of government.  The new mantra was not “that government is best which governs least” but instead, “The concept of the general welfare is not a static one”…. “Needs that were narrow or parochial a century ago may be interwoven in our day with the well-being of the nation. What is critical or urgent changes with the times.”   (Helvering v. Davis, 301 U.S. 619, 641, 57 S.Ct. 904, 909, 81 L.Ed. 1307, 1315 [1937])

From that time forward Courts held that there appeared to be only four (all extra-constitutional) prerequisites to a finding that a spending clause measure and condition attached to it are valid: (1) The federal power is used for a legitimate national purpose, i.e., promotion of the general welfare (Charles C. Steward Machine Co. v. Davis, 301 U.S. 548 at pp. 585–590, 57 S.Ct. at pp. 890–92 [1937], 81 L.Ed. at pp. 1290–1293); (2) the condition is related to a legitimate national goal (Charles C. Steward Machine Co. v. Davis, supra, at pp. 590–591, 57 S.Ct. at pp. 892–93, 81 L.Ed. at pp. 1292–1293; See also Note, Federal Grants and the Tenth Amendment: ‘Things As They Are’ and Fiscal Federalism (1981) 50 Fordham L.Rev. 130, 140–141); (3) the condition is related to the purpose of the federal funds whose receipt is conditioned (FCC v. League of Women Voters (1984) 468 U.S. 364, 104 S.Ct. 3106, 3132, 82 L.Ed.2d 278, 309 (Rehnquist, J. dissenting); State of Okl. v. Schweiker, 655 F.2d at pp. 407, 411); and (4) the condition is unambiguous (Pennhurst State School v. Halderman,  451 U.S. at p. 17, 101 S.Ct. at pp. 1539–40 [January 23, 1984])(Pennhurst State School And Hosp v Halderman).
It was in the spirit of such a “living constitution” that Chief Justice John Roberts allied himself with the enemies of limited government on June 28, 2012.  And it is in that sense, much like the Supreme Court in 1937, ruling in Roosevelt’s favor in both of the Social Security Cases, Helvering and Charles Steward above, that Chief Justice John Roberts “saved the Supreme Court” (http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/power-players-abc-news/did-chief-justice-roberts-save-supreme-court-103301790.html).  More likely, Chief Justice John Roberts just danced on Chief Justice John Marshall’s grave and said, “You think that failure to follow the Constitution is Judicial Treason?  Well, let’s see what you’re going to do about it now.”  According to that same article, Chief Justice Roberts had told the Senate at his confirmation hearings:
“Judges are like umpires. Umpires don’t make the rules; they apply them,” said Roberts at the time. “The role of an umpire and a judge is critical. They make sure everybody plays by the rules, but it is a limited role. Nobody ever went to a ballgame to see the umpire.”

Now, strangely enough, Chief Justice John Marshall wrote a very different kind of opinion in 1820:

The judiciary cannot, as the legislature may, avoid a measure because it approaches the confines of the constitution. We cannot pass it by because it is doubtful. With whatever doubts, with whatever difficulties, a case may be attended, we must decide it, if it be brought before us. We have no more right to decline the exercise of jurisdiction which is given, than to usurp that which is not given. The one or the other would be treason to the constitution. Questions may occur which we would gladly avoid; but we cannot avoid them. All we can do is, to exercise our best judgment, and conscientiously to perform our duty.  Cohens v State of Virginia, 19 U.S. 264, 5 L.Ed. 257, 6 Wheaton 264 (March 3, 1820)

There is a great deal of confusion among the commentators and pundits, I think, about what “Judicial activism” really means.  I would NOT call Chief Justice John Marshall a Judicial Activist—although, indeed, he advocated throughout his 35 years on the bench a considerably more positive role for the Court in preserving the Constitution than Chief Justice John Roberts has shown to date.  “Judicial Activism” does not mean “striking down unconstitutional laws”—“Judicial Activism” as a term should be reserved for reshaping or restructuring the laws in the absence of Congressional Authority to do so.  The “Warren Court” from 1953-1971 was the epitome of “judicial activism”—the Supreme Court during those two decades effectively rewrote the laws of the United States and told CONGRESS and the STATES what to do, rather than vice-versa.

In the case of Obamacare, Chief Justice John Roberts acts his role as an umpire very poorly.  He has seen the foul, called it (under the commerce clause) and “covered it up” under the guise of the taxing power, which (in reality) is even less constitutionally justified than the commerce clause rationale (which at least has the past 75 years of tradition—however illegitimate, behind it).

And so was the U.S. Constitution rewritten in 1937 to allow for first the “relatively” modest program of Social Security and now, 75 years later—on the occasion of the 75th Annual Hunger Games (cf. Suzanne Collins, Catching Fire [2009] and Mockingjay [2010], both New York: Scholastic Press)—Obamacare comes forward to cap the fraud by, in Chief Justice John Roberts’ view—a non-coercive, mere “Tax” on those who do not buy governmentally mandated insurance… and of course, jail for those who do not pay their taxes.

SO WHAT IS THE SHORT-TERM SOLUTION?  NULLIFY OBAMACARE!  I should say that, without any hesitation whatsoever, I absolutely endorse and support the Tenth Amendment Center’s position on Obamacare (this Los Angeles based think tank is just one of the brightest stars on the Political Horizon—of our New Red Dawn):

Now that the Supremes have crushed Constitutional limits once again, the next step is to focus all our energy on a state and local level to NULLIFY this – and every other – unconstitutional act.
We have model legislation for yor state.  Ready to go right now.  Press your state reps to introduce this bill today, or for the next legislative session.
http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/legislation/federal-health-care-nullification-act/
Please SHARE this information widely!
*******
We need your help to continue this work, and help people take the next step at the state level.  Please join us, and help nullification happen!  Whether it’s $500 or $5, every bit of help right now is crucial!
Please visit this link to help now:
http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/donate/
*******
Thomas Jefferson told us that when the government “assumes undelegated powers” a nullification is THE “rightful remedy”
James Madison said that states were “duty bound to interpose….to arrest the progress of evil”
Today’s ruling is an assumption of undelegated powers, and evil is advancing.  The time to act in support of nullification in your area is NOW!  Please share the model legislation for Obamacare with as many people as possible, and please chip in as generously as possible to help us push this campaign aggressively.
While the task is difficult, our cause is just.
Concordia res parvae crescunt,
(small thing grow great by concord)
Michael Bolding
Tenth Amendment Center
==================================================
Our mailing address is:
Tenth Amendment Center
123 S. Figueroa St
Suite 1614
Los Angeles, CA 90012
Our telephone:
213.935.0553

AND WHAT DO I DO AS I WATCH ALL THIS TRANSPIRE?

I sigh.  I cry.  And sometimes I just want to lie down and die.  This is not the land of my birth, even though on the map it generally looks like it should be the same country as it was in 1960.

The transformation over the past fifty two years is simply horrific.  52 years was a key cycle of time among the Aztec, Maya, Mixtec, Tarascans & Zapotec in ancient Mesoamerica, and I can only say that I feel a certain sympathy for how an Aztec born in 1518 might have felt looking at the wreckage of his once proud nation in 1570 after 52 years of Spanish conquest, rape and pillage.  Like an Aztec born in the last year before the arrival of the Spanish, I have grown up and come to age watching my own people (the American Middle Class, especially Protestants of European descent) reduced to second class status, my people’s most attractive and beautiful women taken as prizes by the conquerors, my nation’s heritage and values denigrated, suppressed and taught in the schools as nothing but “heresy” from the New World Order.

I do speak Spanish fairly well and have spent many of the happier moments in my life in Mexico and elsewhere in the Hispanic World, from Bogotá to Barcelona, and I keep in touch with many friends and acquaintances of a Constitutional mindset from those parts of the world.  When they ask me what I consider to be the greatest single constitutional development under the Presidency of Barack Hussein Obama, I tell them without hesitation: N.A.D.A.  (aka Senate Bill 1867, you know, the statute that effectively repealed the Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Amendments that passed the Senate 93-7 last December).

Florida Judiciary—A Copyrighted Survey for use in fighting Mortgage Foreclosure Corruption—What do you know about your Court System? How Hungry are the American People for Justice?

There is no such thing as the silent exercise of your right to speak freely and share your opinion about the world you live in—effective silent protest occurs only in dreams….  We all dream of a better world, but we must speak out loud and SHOUT to make it into a demand, to make it happen…. Dreaming is free, but if we dream of freedom….especially in this, post-New Deal, New Dark Age for America…. that will cost us—what I ask of you today is just a few minutes of your time…  It’s time to make our anger “Catch Fire”…..and that can only happen if we all speak our discontent loudly and often….until there real change happens…. Nothing about modern America is more deplorable than the state of the judiciary and the courts…..

The fabulous hit movie this Spring, the Hunger Games, was a clarion call to the American People to WAKE UP BEFORE IT’S TOO LATE—even if it already is  in some easy ways “too late”, because so much damage has already been done.  Suzanne Collins has showed us the bleak future that awaits all of us if we are calm, cool, and quiescent about the terrible corruption that has taken charge of the American Dream, of Democracy, of (the mere word and illusion of) Freedom, of the Financial Establishment, of the Government, of everything that ever was or could be important to us: our family, our homes, and our future.   My primary focus for the past twenty five years has been on the Judiciary, 21 of those past years specifically involved in projects in Florida.  So I invite you to help me, and several million other people, out here: GIVE US YOUR OPINIONS, WITH YOUR NAME, AND STAND UP AND BE COUNTED, AND READY TO TESTIFY IF WE ARE EVEN ALLOWED TO PUT ON THIS TESTIMONY (as we should be):

Florida: 06-06-2012 DECLARATION CONCERNING JUDICIAL HABITS

Rule 406 of the Federal Rules of Evidence allows specific evidence of habit and routine practice to be admitted in Court.

Carrie Luft is seeking to overturn a Final Judicial Decree which was upheld on appeal in Florida.  The only way to reopen the case is the prove judicial corruption.  Wrongful foreclosure and fraudulent claims to standing, after a case is final, can only be proved if the system itself is indictable, if there is demonstrable systematic fraud on the Court—if the system is “broken,” if the judges are either “bought and paid for” or coerced into thinking in conformity with the Banks’ position.  All of these things have to be proved as a conspiracy to defraud and impose uniform outcomes on foreclosure cases.  It is a ONE THEORY, ONE SHOT, deal, although everyone who has been a victim can and could try (and I wish they would).
To prove this systemic corruption, which many people suspect, we need to gather EVERYONE who has been a victim together in one place, and that place is going to be reserved and formed through the complaint we are preparing in Carrie’s case.  If we fail, Carrie has no chance to regain her home, but I have already taken a blood oath that I will never stop until I have figured out a way to restore judicial integrity and moral honor to the judicial system in which I quite literally started my legal career, and of which I once dreamed of being an integral part.  Carrie is the first person I know who has accepted the challenge of doing everything that is necessary to try to take on the system.  Carrie literally has only this one option: prove that the system if “fixed”, broken, and corrupt.  I ask you, everyone who receives this survey:
IF YOU HAVE ANY EXPERIENCE WITH THE COURTS OF FLORIDA AT ALL, PLEASE COMPLETE THIS SURVEY, SIGN IT, SCAN IT and either E-MAIL IT BACK TO THIS ADDRESS: lincoln_for_california@rocketmail.com OR RETURN IT BY REGULAR MAIL TO
Peyton Yates Freiman, Tierra Limpia Trust/ Deo Vindice Foundation at:
603 Elmwood Place, #6 
Austin, Texas 78705
And if you have further or additional direct or circumstantial evidence of judicial corruption in Florida, how it is done and how does it, please write a letter about that as well.  We are looking to prove habits and routine practices of Judges according to Rule 406 of the Federal Rules of Evidence.  

06-06-2012 DECLARATION CONCERNING JUDICIAL HABITS

If you have any experience at all with the Florida Judicial System, especially if you have any experience with any mortgage or foreclosure related incidents, we need your opinion here…. Copyright to the survey itself, and to all material received will belong to Tierra Limpia Trust/Deo Vindice Foundation, Charles Edward Lincoln, III, Founder & President, Peyton Yates Freiman Trustee.

Please return all hard copies to:

Peyton Yates Freiman 603 Elmwood Place, Suite 6, Austin, Texas 78705.

April 13: The Hunger Games, Judicial Immunity, and the Dawn of a New Dark Age

Life in its petty pace from day-to-day (and related notes on why I’m not on the California ballot)

Is it a coincidence that the California Secretary of State refused to approve me for a ballot place as candidate for the United States Senate Seat currently held by Diane Feinstein within 3 days of Facebook Canceling my profile because I was “promoting or organizing violence?”  Since I have never (to the best of my knowledge) advocated (much less “organized”) violence except to praise the spirit of continuing revolution, it was a great shock to me, but that was how my Spring season began.  (My long-time personal assistant and “Man Friday” Peyton assures me that I’ve never organized anything in my life, violent, peaceful, or indifferent)  

The snafu that led to my ballot position not being approved may yet prove the subject of a lawsuit, so I shan’t go into details except to say: California’s “Top Two, Voter Nominated” primary system only makes sense if non-professional political operatives (i.e. “voters”) are actually permitted to nominate candidates, and this requires a certain exercise of common sense on the part of the Registrar of Voters in each county as well as the Secretary of State.  Obviously, my supporters are largely battered down middle class working people who no longer trust the government to begin with.  They are anything BUT government insiders.  If only political insiders can maneuver the system then it is NOT a true “voter nominated” system.

I would guess that, in fact, the “top two” system was designed to protect the best funded insider candidates from even any hypothetical threat from outsiders like me, and that is, of course, a way of stifling change and preventing any real “dynamic” in the democratic process.  “Top two” primaries arguably serve a system well-designed to engender a “thousand year reich”, ironic indeed since one would think that individuals of Barbara Boxer’s, Diane Feinstein’s and Henry Waxman’s background and ethnic origins would not WANT a thousand year reich….but perhaps the quibble was with the identity of the master race destined to rule for a millennium, rather than whether a unitary elite should have such power…. forever.

Remembering V-for-Vendetta and Serenity from 2005-2006

The only redeeming feature of Spring 2012 so far is a new movie, which equals and possibly surpasses in political insight my (obvious, previous) all time favorite: V-for-Vendetta.   V-for-Vendetta was a futuristic science fiction (literally based on cartoon characters based on a four centuries old English school boys’  rhyme about a highly manipulated historical even in 1605) and as such it served as an allegory about 9-11 and the “W” Bush (43rd Presidential) administration in the USA.   The lead characters, the Guy Fawkes’ masked “V” (Hugo Weaving) and Evey Hammond” (Nathalie Portman), were an amazing couple NOT in love (at least not romantically, and not in any way at all, at least not until Evey’s post-mortem eulogy) were, as cartoon characters are, difficult to relate to any ordinary people one might encounter in life.  

The brilliance of V-for-Vendetta was the incisive treatment of 9-11 and all that had happened in and around that date under the Bush 43 administration: barely a stone was left unturned to expose the rotten mould and horrible colony of insect life underneath it.  The sad part about V-for-Vendetta is that it’s message apparently resonated with so few people.  

As a movie, it should have had a national impact on political thought, revealing the ruling government as an oligarchy of hypocrisy, lies and fear through government media manipulation concealing a simple policy of orchestrated terrorism attributed to foreigners, specifically Islamic fundamentalists, in the justification of never-ending war, even though it was in fact the brainchild policy of the government itself.  

Above all, V-for-Vendetta reminded us of Adolf Hitler’s brilliant but evil insight, that the great mass of people will sooner believe a great lie than a small one.  Another movie concerning a “big lie” by the government was Joss Whedon’s beautiful epic Serenity.  The tale of the outer-space “wild-west racially non-discriminatory confederates” was, in so many ways, merely the extra galactic, historically unspecific, parallel to V.  Unlike V, Serenity did not focus on any specific modern event like 9-11, but  very generally shared a focus on governmental experiments in biotechnology and psychological manipulation as the root of transformational events in human history.  Of course, Serenity very unusually and distinctively echoed and memorialized the injustice of the Confederate defeat at the hands of a technologically superior Centralized government (“the Federation”).

Die Hungerspiele von Panem/Die Tribute von Panem (Totliche Spiele) (You’re a Damn Confederate, aren’t you?)

The new movie which in my mind at least now threaten’s V-for-Vendetta’s supremacy as the greatest political movie of our time premiered on Friday March 23, and is of course, the Hunger Games. (I confess I have not read Suzanne Collins’ books—everything I say here is based on the movie and the movie alone, which I found absolutely overwhelming—but I didn’t read Gone with the Wind until I was 26, by which time I had seen the movie at leas 30 times in my life).  The Hunger Games lacks any of the cartoonish elements of V-for-Vendetta and Serenity (as much as I like and appreciate the genuinely artistic value of those elements).  

My suspicions of Collins’ perspectives as those of a not-so-closet Confederate sympathizer gain more than moderate a bolster from the knowledge that, although born in Connecticut, the author was the daughter of a Vietnam veteran and spent her High School (i.e. critical formative identity) years in the heart of Dixie, specifically in Alabama in the 1970s…. where she attended  high school at the Alabama School of Fine Arts in Birmingham, where she was a Theater Arts major.  Oh yea, FWIW, the Alabama School of Fine Arts was founded by George Corley Wallace’s Wife, Governor Lurleen Wallace, in 1968, shortly before she tragically died of Cancer at age 41, and George Corley Wallace was Governor 1971-1979, all through Suzanne’s High School years.

Now, one way of looking at it is that, perhaps, the Hunger Games takes place after the collapse of the United States and Civil War to which the government news commentators in V-for-Vendetta made such frequent allusion.  According to those reports, the USA “the country that had everything” had become a “cesspool” of continental proportions due to its “Godlessness.”  While that’s a legitimate perspective, I think that the overwhelming weight of evidence and frame of reference in the Hunger Games is to the War of Southern Independence/War Between the States/War of 1861-1973, realizing that those dates are not the ones usually used in High School American History texts.

In fact, The Hunger Games in some of its visuals at least, almost approximates a kind of a futuristic Nanook of the North staged realism, focusing on the lives of the common people of the post-War (I mean Post-War Between the States) south, especially of the Appalachian regions of North Carolina (where The Hunger Games was filmed “on site”).  As in Whedon’s Serenity, the strong suggestion of Confederate nostalgia and sympathy is, to my mind at least, absolutely undeniable.  

It is too much to ask that we NOT see parallels to the War of 1861-65 and its aftermath when the “Treaty of the Treason” and “War” movie both recite that 13 Districts of “Panem” (“Panem” to my eyes sounds like a Hellenized partial translation of “E Pluribus Unum“, cf. Pangea) rose up against the Paternalistic “Welfare” Government that “fed them, protected them, cared for them”, that the District 12 setting is so obviously the REAL Southern landscape of coal-mining Appalachia, and that the poor whites of District 12 have a closely parallel lives and culture to at least the partially segregated black-African dominated population of District 11.

Without wanting totally to “spoil” the Hunger Games for anyone who hasn’t seen it, I will just summarize my interpretation of its wild popularity this way (aside from the obvious: a very human love story about two extraordinarily mature for their age teenagers who were unlikely ever to have fallen in love, but end up being “perfect” for each other, played by a genuinely handsome “All American Boy” lead and beautiful soft-spoken and emotional “Tomboy-type-Girl” who is so hot she literally sets her red dress on fire, combined with lots of action): Even though most Americans are not in fact hungry for food (that is the “Nano of the North” element reality of the starving South of 1865-1950, seeing oppressed, hard-working, underdogs whose primary source of protein was from very small game—squirrels, because the deer were almost all hunted out) people are clearly hungry for genuine justice and a fair playing field. (For one alternative, but to my mind, quite beautifully written and  excellent review of the Hunger Games, I recommend “The Feminist Spectator” by Princeton University’s Jill Dolan, published on April 4: http://www.feministspectator.blogspot.com/.  I somehow doubt that Professor Dolan would agree with me on the strong Confederate Sympathies implicit in The Hunger Games but there was once a President of Princeton University, the only Ph.D. ever to become President of the USA in fact, who thought that Birth of a Nation was the greatest historical drama in history, and portrayed the reality of his native south perfectly—unfortunately, that was also the Democratic President who signed into law (1) the 16th Amendment and Federal Income Tax, (2) the Federal Reserve Banking System, and the (3) the 17th Amendment, namely Woodrow Wilson….)

Hunger for Justice and Freedom

Like the residents of the 13 oppressed Districts of Panem, despite all government hypocrisy and lies to the contrary Americans both you and old today know that the odds are NOT in their favor and that, in fact, the odds are fairly hopelessly stacked against them.  And yet the system has this tiny escape valve: that about 1 in every 24 people can make it rich.  That is, one-in-twenty four of the oppressed can make it rich IF they’re willing to “play the government’s game” and basically, kill a lot of their fellow citizens in the process.  As of this April 13, 2012, I have seen the Hunger Games 5 times, and each time I’ve liked it more, seen more details.  I will have to read the books before completely integrating it into my thought processes about modern pop-cultural reaction to the impending doom that this American Life obviously faces, but I submit to you: the American people (on the whole, and certainly as a population compared to many parts of the world at the present and throughout history) may not be starving or hungry for food, but they hunger for justice and an even playing field, and they do not “relish” the very real prospect of a thousand years of subservience to “the government that feeds, them clothes them, takes care of them.”

Of Time and Space and Presidential Succession in the Leap Years…..

The Hunger Games takes place on the 74th anniversary of the institution of these gladiatorial combats.  The significance of that 74 years has bothered me.  On the one hand, it COULD refer to 1860 (the election of Abraham Lincoln and the secession of “District 1, South Carolina…) + 74 = 1934, the year in which Roosevelt’s New Deal started WPA reorganization of the South in earnest, or it could refer to the original publication date of the book, 2008, as the 74th year since 1934—or it could refer to both.  The coincidence, again, is hard to avoid.  1934 was the first full year of (de facto) Socialist Dictatorship in the United States (Franklin Delano Roosevelt was elected in 1932, took office in March 1933, and many of his first year legislative proposals only took effect in 1934).  2008, 74 years later, Barack Hussein Obama, the first Communist President of the United States, was elected and took office, “perfecting” or at least completing the process begun by Abraham Lincoln in 1860, a mere 12 years after the publication of the Communist Manifesto in London in 1848.  (See Al Benson, Jr., & Walter Donald Kennedy’s 2011: Lincoln’s Marxists, Pelican Publishing, Gretna Louisiana, a fine historical summary of the connexion between Communism and Central government predominance in the USA, a historical summary which is easy to read although not nearly well-enough documented with footnotes and source citations as professional historians would like and scholars generally would appreciate).

Another aspect of the Hunger Games is the correlation between the oppressive Central government of Panem and Edward Gibbons’ the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, on the one hand, and a heartless, Machiavellian version of the Social Darwinism of the late 19th century on the other.  The capital of Panem is degenerate in a distinctly Roman Imperial Silver Age manner (Rome’s “Silver Age” normally said to run from the death of Augustus in A.D. 14 through the death of Marcus Aurelius in A.D. 180).  Nero and even Caracalla (“Post-Silver Age” Emperor from A.S. 198-217) would have felt quite at home in the Capitol of Panem, I think.  But the “Emperor” himself is a distinctly late 19th century Anglo-American type (President Snow, played by Donald Sutherland), who has a Romano-“Robber-Baron’s” scorn for the “underdog” without any explanation or moral justification, just the political desire to keep himself and his world on top and everyone else underneath.  President Snow appears to share none of the cultural degeneracy of the Capital, but has a great deal in common with aristocratic Victorian gardeners of the late 19th century.  

Snow’s name is English, as are most of the names of the characters known from District 12.  Most of the residents of the Capitol City, however, and apparently of Districts 1-2, have Roman names: “Cato”, “Caesar”, “Seneca”, “Octavia”, and “Claudius” just to name a few…..  

So the Hunger Games follows the pattern of Serenity and V-for-Vendetta in another distinctly modern way (although all these movies do it well, and for good purposes and effect, quite a few others, such as Captain America and [the movie that I dread most]—Abraham Lincoln, Vampire Slayer, do it very poorly and for improper purposes): historical metaphors and mythic realities are conflated, merged, and reorganized.

NOX OCCIDIT (“NIGHT FALLS”)

In any event, there is a Leonard Cohen song that summarizes why the Hunger Games, as a historical-mythological and futuristic allegory of injustice and game rigging, is so wildly popular, and that song is:

Everybody knows that the dice are loaded
Everybody rolls with their fingers crossed
Everybody knows that the war is over
Everybody knows the good guys lost
Everybody knows the fight was fixed
The poor stay poor, the rich get rich
That’s how it goes
Everybody knows

Everybody knows that it’s me or you
And everybody knows that you live forever
Ah when you’ve done a line or two
Everybody knows the deal is rotten
Old Black Joe’s still pickin’ cotton
For your ribbons and bows
And everybody knows

And everybody knows that the Plague is coming
Everybody knows that it’s moving fast
Everybody knows that the naked man and woman
Are just a shining artifact of the past
Everybody knows the scene is dead
But there’s gonna be a meter on your bed
That will disclose
What everybody knows

And everybody knows that you’re in trouble
Everybody knows what you’ve been through 
From the bloody cross on top of Calvary 
To the beach of Malibu 
Everybody knows it’s coming apart
Take one last look at this Sacred Heart
Before it blows
And everybody knows

The saddest difference between V-for-Vendetta and Serenity on the one hand and the Hunger Games on the other is the complete transparency of the society of Panem: “Everybody knows that the system’s rotten…. everybody knows that the war is over, everybody knows that the good guys lost.”  Everybody knows that the government that feeds the people, clothes them, and cares for them does not like underdogs.  President Snow is a late 19th Century-styled  avatar of George H.W. Bush (41st), Bill Clinton, George W. Bush (43rd), & Barack Hussein Obama all rolled into one.  

At least in V-for-Vendetta and Serenity, there still existed the apparent hope that revelation of truth could lead to revolution and change. 

But now President Obama signs the National Defense Authorization Act allowing indefinite detention of American Citizens on American soil without charges or trial, and he does so unblinkingly and unabashedly.  President Obama jingoistically adopts the dead Trayvon Martin as his own son in an effort to exacerbate racial tensions and divisions to his advantage in an election year at the same time that he tells the AIPAC Conference that he supports Israel’s quest to maintain ethnic homogeneity and integrity.  

There are no secrets in modern America, our Joseph Stalin, aka President Obama, has no need of Hitlerian, Rooseveltian, or “W” Bushian type “Big Lie”—he tells us all that he wants the power to take away all our rights, but asks us to trust him that he won’t really do it—except in the case of real underdogs, like, I guess, for example, George Zimmerman?  And speaking of that, how many of you imagine that George Zimmerman, whether he be called White, Hispanic, or Jewish, or all of the above, will get a fair trial?

So now to celebrate April 13 even further: WHERE WILL WE BE 74 years from now, or from 2008, say in 2082?  I predict we may well be in a New Dark Age, and not just because I’m not on the California Ballot for this year (although that is symptomatic).  

So far as “fixed games” go, what could be worse than a criminal prosecution set by agreement between Judges and prosecutors arranged through bribes?  Is that the American Way?  We wouldn’t like to think so.  In 1980, the year I graduated from the College of Arts & Sciences at Tulane and started graduate school at Harvard, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in California said that “fixing” cases was not a normal judicial function and that no judicial immunity could attach to such activities: Rankin v Howard 633 F2d 844 _9th Circuit December 5 1980.  A short six years later, that same Ninth Circuit reversed itself and found judicial immunity from civil suit for such activities: Ashelman v Pope 793 F2d 1072 *EN BANC* 9th Circuit 1986

But the outrageous history of the suppression of judicial immunity just goes on and on through the subsequent citation history of Ashelman v. Pope to show how official immunity for prosecutors and the executive branch has almost merged with Judicial immunity to the point that the government is just one big immune mass of oppression against the people, and the modern government of E Pluribus Unum, aka “Panem” can prosecute you, jail you, and torture you, with complete immunity.

Why the “Birther” Movement is Irrelevant: Gingrich, Romney, & Santorum will all do the same as Obama! Only Ron Paul stands out, and either they have or are trying to bury him.

In late July of 2009, Steve Colbert interviewed Dr. Orly Taitz, D.D.S., Esq., in New York City on the Colbert report, and poked fun at her theory regarding Obama’s use of a deceased individual’s social security number, suggesting the use of this social security number (reassigned from the original owner’s name without leave of the Commissioner of Social Security) could mean that Obama was really a disguised “Connecticut Vampire” almost 110 years old.  At dinner after taping the interview, Orly and I agreed that Obama was almost surely a vampire, but whether an undead revenant or not, he was certainly not from Connecticut…  But of course, the truth is, it simply does not matter where Obama was from.  What matter’s is where he is and what he’s doing: Obama is carrying on with George W. Bush’s policies (which were also Clinton’s and Daddy Bush 41st’s policies, and sadly, sorrowfully, Ronald Reagan’s policies as well) of sinking the United States deeper and deeper into Soviet Socialist Communism.  I confess that’s a pretty sore indictment of the past 32 years of American Politics, but I also confess that I am pretty sore about it. The reason for this soreness is that my indictment actually extends back over what successive generations of my family have been fighting and dealing with directly or indirectly for the past 150 years of American Politics.  

The Centralized Statist (originally monarchist, later Socialist) descendants of Alexander Hamilton and Abraham Lincoln have added on increasingly serious counts of treason at intervals in 1913, 1916-19, and 1933-37, 1953-57, 1963-8, and 1971-4….(never mind 1992-3, 1995-1996, 2001-2003, 2007, 2011).  Quite simply, the United States Ship of State is sinking, and no salvage in Admiralty is likely, despite the wilder fantasies of some of my brethren in the so-called Patriot movement.

The “Birther” Movement, of which I was for six strange months in 2009 an extremely active member, misses the mark: the President of the United States is merely a figurehead. The President is no more the Constitutional Administrator of a small and limited Federal Government (on the model of the Country as it was for most of the 72 years from George Washington-James Buchanan) than the Queen of England is the de facto chief executive of England. But neither is the President actually the Dictator, Chairman, or Imam of the United States: the President of the United States acts and serves as  the mouthpiece for the Federal Reserve Banking System, which with the IRS and the Social Security System constitutes the “legislative branch” of the three part government.  The Federal Reserve (although it has both judicial and executive powers), effectively “makes the rules” for the rest of the government.  The IRS is the Executive Branch (policing compliance and conformity with unwritten laws) and the Social Security System exercises a quasi-judicial function of “dolling out welfare and benefits” to the population at large. 

All of this is  “just fine” by Newt Gingrich, Mitt Romney, and Rick Santorum, the first three winners of the Republican Presidential Primary System.  They are do nothing, know nothing stooges.  Only Ron Paul has an iota of integrity against this nightmare.

During the seven year period November 18, 1956 through August 24, 1963, Nikita Kruschchev repeatedly paraphrased Karl Marx in sayng, “We will Bury You” (to the West)(The actual quote from the Communist Manifesto of 1848 is: “What the bourgeoisie therefore produces, above all, are its own grave-diggers. Its fall and the victory of the proletariat are equally inevitable“.

Now no one has actually quoted the line Nikita Kruschchev repeated so often to Paul.  In effect, the other three Republicans, acting as well as three expensive three-piece business-suit wearingCommunist Undertakers for Capitalism can possibly do, have agreed among themselves and told the Congressman from Texas, “We will bury you.”  And the mainstream media has joined shovels with the extremely well-funded Central Bank sponsored Proletariats in this regard.  

Now that South Carolina, once the most reliably conservative, anti-centralist state in the Union, has been manipulated to cast its lot for Gingrich…. Ron Paul’s supporters are very sounding very unhappy:

GINGRICH SUCCESS MEANS TEA PARTY SURRENDER

The Tea Party originally stood for one simple but important message: Stop Spending. For Tea Partiers, TARP was the litmus test and any Republican who supported it faced the wrath of the movement.

Tea Party support for Newt Gingrich is as mind-boggling as it is depressing. Gingrich stands for everything the Tea Party was against: TARP, bank bailouts, healthcare mandates, cap-and-trade, you name it.

If the Tea Party abandons its “Stop Spending” message it becomes just another part of the Republican Party, the movement loses its original independence and simply morphs back into the GOP machine–something both right and left critics always said would happen. Sen. Lindsey Graham bragged in 2010 that the Tea Party would “die out” because it had “no governing vision.” I argued that as long as the Tea Party stood firmly against spending it would remain an indomitable force in American politics.

Is Graham now being proven right?

Ron Paul wants to cut $1 trillion his first year in office. Newt Gingrich calls Paul’s plan too extreme and a “non-starter.” The choice for any serious Tea Party member is clear.

But that it is not clear for many represents the first signs that the Tea Party might be waning. One need not necessarily support Ron Paul to be a Tea Partier. But supporting Newt Gingrich negates the entire point of even having a Tea Party.

American politics before the Tea Party was mostly a popularity contest. The Tea Party  was supposed to represent something more substantive. Gingrich is a good speaker which makes him popular. But the same is true of Barack Obama. The devilish aspects of charming candidates always lies in the details. This is especially true of Newt Gingrich.

The moment Tea Partiers decide they are no longer concerned with such details, they surrender their movement.

http://www.ronpaul2012.com/2012/01/21/gingrich-success-means-tea-party-surrender/

The mythology of the Imperial President, “King of the World” is deadly and all-pervasive.  It is also a very destructive charade. I started to write this piece a couple of nights ago when I first published Montgomery Blair Sibley’s plan to run as a write-in candidate for President in the District of Columbia so that he would have “candidate” standing to sue in Quo Warranto regarding the qualifications of Barack Hussein Obama to run for reelection.  Because it is always more interesting to discuss what one might agree with a candidate about than what everyone would disagree about, I chose to wait, and so when first writing about Sibley, I addressed his (very sound and correct, if extravagant SOUNDING) proposal to increase the membership of the House of Representation from 435-10,000.  But today’s results in South Carolina (January 21, 2012), with “Hard Labor Prison Planet Advocate” Newt Gingrich coming in first ahead of “I am the People’s Republic of Massachusetts” Mitt Romney and “I’m a nearly braindead Neocon who supports the War on Terror and Arbitrary Arrest, but in addition I support Federal Censorship, Thought Police and Direct Federal Control over the Content of Your Children’s Biology Education but I support Israel Unquestioningly” Santorum was profoundly depressing.  Those primary results from the heart of Dixie, the very soul of nullificationist and secessionist  States Rights from Andrew Jackson’s Vice-President and later Senator John Caldwell Calhoun (1782-1850) right up through the death of the late Senator Strom Thurmond (1902-2003), made it imperative that I write and say this emphatically: THE PRESIDENCY OF THE UNITED STATES IS IRRELEVANT WINDOW DRESSING—IT IS A COVER, IT IS MERELY A MASQUE, ALTHOUGH NOT QUITE SO OBVIOUSLY SO AS THE GUY FAWKES’ MASK THAT SERVES AS THE INITIAL ICON OF THIS BLOG.  We need to spend MUCH less time thinking about who will be President and much MORE time thinking about who will be in the Congress and the Senate.  These offices and races are the HEART of the Constitutional, Democratic-Republican plan, and yet they are all but written off by radical activists such as Montgomery Blair Sibley who might actually have a shot at being elected in a local or State-wide race.  The media, of course, conspires in this—as if the President were really a God and the White House were really a Pharaoh (etymologically the word Pharaoh or “pr-aa” was a royal title meaning “God House” to the ancient Egyptians of the New Kingdom).

I would urge all who really want change to FORGET ABOUT THE PRESIDENCY and start thinking about how to restore GENUINE Constitutional Democratic-Republican government in the United States.

The Death & Destruction of Private Property in the USA: why are we so complacent?

The Christmas Season in the history-conscious Texas-Louisiana family where I grew up always ended with January 8, Battle of New Orleans Day.  I suppose this day was as important to the 19th Century South as 9-11 is to the World of the 21st Century… albeit it was a Patriotic Day of much greater optimism and affirmation of liberty than pessimism and fear of phantoms.

What amazes me at present is that the Presidential election season has started in earnest and nobody is standing up for the defrauded, the dispossessed and the defeated in this country despite the fact that no single episode of continuous destruction of homes, families, and private property has happened on the present scale anywhere in the USA since the War of 1861-1865, in the midst of whose sadly understudied sesquicentennial we are currently coasting, only partially aware, as seems to be the modern American norm.  But the truth is that it is only possible to understand what is happening in modern America if we realize that the destruction of private property is proceeding NATIONWIDE now at approximately the same rate as it was happening in Virginia and Georgia during the final year of the War Between the States in 1864-65.  Family and local heritage and inheritance are being wiped out, systematically, and with just as much government endorsement and approval as during any war, but without any attempt at justification.  I can only guess that the justification has already been written, and so it seems redundant to repeat it now: The Communist Manifesto of 1848, which is about to celebrate its 164th year in print (since 1848) predicted (well, actually, demanded) the centralization of banking and rampant extensions of frivolously predatory credit which have led to the present meltdown.  In the 1930s-50s, certain elites decided that if Communism was to be implemented in the United States, it had to be done gradually, stealthily, with the appearance of democratic approval and due process of law.   All continuity and “rootedness” in American communities is being subjected to massive disruption and near obliteration—long-term stability and inheritance of local knowledge and traditions is endangered.  The world is being “shaked and baked” into dependent homogeneity rather than independent diversity.   Individual ownership and family inheritance of real and personal property are being being wiped out in the interests of a destabilized society whose only recourse to survive is to depend upon the “generosity” and “benevolence” of an all-powerful government.  I can see no sadder end to civilization.

The official answer to these accusations was articulated recently by a San Diego attorney who is dedicated to the destruction of private property in favor of “corporate-governmental” ownership of property:

“Your letter below serves as an excellent example for why you should consider hiring an attorney who is familiar with the law. I am disinterested in discussing your theory that California Civil Code 2924 is in actuality a communist plot to divest the citizens of California of their right to hold private property. Or that the US Constitution can be construed to permit a person to default on their contractual obligations to pay their mortgage, without any consequence.

Our judgment has not expired, it is still a judgment in our favor and it is still good. Our writ has expired because they are only good for 180 days from the time of issuance. Therefore, we are moving for a new writ, which we are legally permitted to do.
Sincerely,
Jessica Partridge, Esq.
Associate Attorney
McCarthy & Holthus, LLP
1770 Fourth Ave.
San Diego, CA 92101
Phone: (619) 955-1508
Fax:     (619) 243-1979
I have to confess than when I was a law student and practicing attorney I simply did not know that the sole purpose of lawyers was to exploit people for personal gain while implementing whatever was the governmental oppression “du jour.”  And yet this is the literary stereotype of lawyers from Shakespeare through Moliere to Dickens.  It was certainly not the kind of law practiced by Marcus Tullius Cicero.   It was definitely the kind of law used against Joan of Arc (whose 600th birthday was celebrated yesterday in France by Front National Presidential Candidate Marine Le Pen—notably NOT by the sitting President Nicolas Sarkozy, who is at least insofar as his ancestry is concerned as much of or even more of a foreigner in France as Obama is in the United States, although Sarkozy’s foreign origins at least derive the same continent as France, unlike Obama who hails from a distinctly non-European, non-American family background, at least on his father’s [Kenyan, Communist, Mau-Mau] side).   One of the most amazing chapters in French History is how la Pucelle d’Orleans handled her own defense against English Clerical Inquisitors, and how she chose integrity and faith in herself and her own personal relationship with God over all earthly advantage or matters.   Another disturbing chapter in the history of lawyers based in France was of course the Dreyfus affair, which seems likely to be repeated ten thousand times in the next few years if America really does ever arrest and detain people under the provisions of the new National Defense Authorization Act which our own foreign President just signed into law within the past few weeks.
But I have digressed from the destruction of private property in America or the government’s support and endorsement of this destruction.  A recent write-up of governmental action as affirmation of the policy of national expropriation was recently brought to my attention and I want to share it:
Independent Foreclosure Review–Beware

Snapshot of the Newest Program

  • The review is not independent
  • The servicers are paying the “Independent Consultants”
  • The servicers are allowed to release “relevant” information to the “Independent Consultants”
  • “Eligibility” has been pre-determined
  • Forgery and fraud are not on the list of things to be reviewed

The Current Climate
We have become a nation of displaced people due to fraudulent and wrongful foreclosures conducted by the banks since the Mortgage Meltdown began in 2007.  Amherst Securities has testified that  1 out 5 homeowners are likely to lose their homes before this crisis ends.  It is estimated that there are at least 62 million securitized loans – loans with lost notes and unclear ownership.  These are the people being foreclosed upon by banks that cannot prove legal ownership.

Fraudulent foreclosures have rampantly permeated across all 50 states. The issue is not limited to robo-signing, or clerical errors, or bank ineptitude.  The issue is much deeper:  Does the bank have the legal right to foreclose?  Any foreclosure proceeding must include clear evidence that the bank is the rightful owner of the note, the deed or mortgage, and they have in their possession the original note with original signatures.  This is the crux of fraudulent foreclosures in our country today.

Yet, the Government has announced a new “program” to get your foreclosure process reviewed “independently”.  The concerns of most homeowner advocacy groups are that this new “independent Foreclosure Review Process is just another bank maneuvered government sham. Their concerns are well justified.  It is.

Analysis of the Independent Review Fact Sheet

A Fact Sheet explaining this new “opportunity” for homeowners, which has been put out by the Housing Policy Council, clearly shows this is not an independent review and homeowners should be very cautious of involving themselves in the process.  It appears to be yet another diversion orchestrated by the banks & US Government to get people’s attention diverted off the underlying issues of their loan and foreclosure using the time-honored and impartial justice system. Instead, tying them up in a very long bank-controlled review process that is anything but independent.
First, let’s take a look at who the Housing Policy Council is:

They are a bunch of bankers dictating to the Government while lining their pockets. They are a subsidiary of the Financial Services Roundtable, which is made up of members who provide mortgages to Americans.  They are a strong lobbying force in DC.  The Housing Policy Council estimates that 65% of all mortgages in the US are originated by the member firms of the Housing Policy Council.  Thus, he who created the foreclosure crisis, then the fraudulent foreclosures, and never once policed himself is in charge of the program to see if he “erred.”  How can this be an independent and impartial review?

This is the Opening Paragraph of the “Fact Sheet”:

“Fourteen U.S. mortgage servicers and their affiliates are making available free, impartial independent Foreclosure Reviews to certain of their borrowers . . ”

Our government must think we are really an ignorant lot.  The servicers who conducted the fraudulent foreclosures are making available this impartial and independent review.  I’m confident by now that anybody who is reviewing this information has safely concluded that there is no impartiality.

But there’s more:  “to certain of their borrowers”

It appears that you can be the victim of a fraudulent foreclosure, yet the independent review process is only available to a selected group.  That could work if that selected group is anybody who has suffered foreclosure proceedings since 2007 when the meltdown began, but that is not the case:

According to the fact sheet, that qualifying group only comprises those who believe they’ve been financially injured as a result of “servicer errors, misrepresentations or other deficiencies in the foreclosure process of their primary residence.”

Their omission of forgery (robo-signing,) and fraud (securitization which obfuscates who owns the loan and if they really are the owner) is a bit too obviously absent. More disconcerting however is the use of the word eligible mostly because of who is eligible.  Are they suggesting that second homes are investment properties were not wrongfully foreclosed upon?

“Borrowers are eligible to submit a Request for Review if 1) their loan was serviced by one of the participating mortgage servicers, 2) their loan was active in the foreclosure process between Jan. 1, 2009 and Dec. 31, 2010, and 3) the property securing the loan was their primary residence.”

Thus, you are eligible if your lender is participating, if it happened during the specified dates and if it was a primary residence.  There’s a word for this:  It is known as minimizing.

Fraudulent foreclosures didn’t only happen to the eligible group.  If the lender is “participating” doesn’t that suggest this activity isn’t independent, and who decided that we only had issues for the past two years?  What about the lenders who don’t participate?  Let’s face it.  If you committed forgery and fraud, participation isn’t a luxury or choice that you have, prosecution and jail time are your fair due.  So why do we get to hear about lenders who are participating, like they signed up to be in a special club?  That’s not independent.

Also of concern, it’s already been determined by the independent group if you are eligible and they’re going to let those 4.5 million borrowers know by mailing them a letter explaining all this.

For those millions of you who have since moved on:  I wonder if they have your new address.  What if your mail forwarding has expired?

The independent review is also pre-determining what would constitute a financial injury, again, forgery and fraud are not on the list.

They’re claiming the process “could take up to several months”. Following in the footsteps of HAMP, more realistically, you will be tied up in this for the next several years, while valid statutes that could have served you well in court expire.

And worst of all, they have decided that the “Foreclosure Reviews will be conducted by independent consultants engaged by the servicers and approved by official sounding government entities.  That is only part of the problem, however.  There’s only one company being used by “all the participating” servicers to manage the incoming complaints.

And the final blow to the word independent comes in the closing paragraph:  Once the request for review forms have been collected by this single vendor, the servicer will provide relevant documents to the independent consultant.

It’s clear that this review should be considered with a cynical eye, and wary countenance.  Unless you show the fraud and forgery in your loan, don’t think it will get revealed by those ‘independents.’

Consider a full securitization audit to include with your submission if you do choose to do this process, minimally get an investigation for robo-signing.  Don’t be duped into thinking once again that the bank and the government are actually going to fix the mess they made of your loan and your life.  Your safer route is to pursue your lender in a court of law, after you’ve gotten that audit and now have the evidence of the fraud and forgery committed in your loan.  Most likely in successful cases, the compensation approved by a judge will be much greater than what you could expect to see from this ‘program’.

Here’s an excellent article that you should read:  Tila Solutions is not the only group expressing concerns over this program. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/25/business/foreclosure-relief-dont-hold-your-breath-fair-game.html?_r=2
Sara Miller

I have Registered as a Candidate for United States Senator, running as a Constitutional Democratic-Republican against Dianne Feinstein, that pillar of the Establishment

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Myyyf3A5uEE&feature=related
I was playing this very inspiring video with JFK, MLK, Jr., and Ron Paul on my I-Pad to a small group in Room 2013 on the second floor of the the Los Angeles County Registrar’s Office for Candidate Registration today. Kennedy was at least nominally a Democrat, although it appears he may have been assassinated, at least in part, for opposing the Federal Reserve and in particular the plan to take silver out of circulation, and hence as a basis for the United States Dollar….which had been “silver” since at least the 1780s…. I was waiting while an even smaller group of unusually efficient bureaucrats processed the paperwork necessary to put my campaign “on-line.”

And so it was that on Friday, December 30, the last business day of 2011, I filed formal campaign papers to run for U.S. Senate against Dianne Feinstein. Many of California’s representatives in Congress are traitors, and should be removed, although I noted with some satisfaction that in the Los Angeles Basin proper, only the very oldest New World Order Advocate/Brave New Warrior Henry Arnold Waxman, voted for the National Defense Authorization Act of 2011…(Fiscal 2012, aka “Indefinite Detention without charges, due process of law, or habeas corpus). Nancy Pelosi, of course, voted with Waxman and the establishment, as did Adam Schiff and Howard Berman, but in the spirit of fairness, I think we owe at least the following 18 Democratic and 4 Republican Representatives on the California delegagtion credit for their courageous “no” votes:
No CA-1 Thompson, C. [D]
No CA-4 McClintock, Tom [R]
No CA-5 Matsui, Doris [D]
No CA-6 Woolsey, Lynn [D]
No CA-7 Miller, George [D]
No CA-9 Lee, Barbara [D]
No CA-12 Speier, Jackie [D]
No CA-13 Stark, Fortney [D]
No CA-14 Eshoo, Anna [D]
No CA-15 Honda, Michael [D]
No CA-16 Lofgren, Zoe [D]
No CA-17 Farr, Sam [D]
No CA-31 Becerra, Xavier [D]
No CA-32 Chu, Judy [D]
No CA-33 Bass, Karen [D]
No CA-34 Roybal-Allard, Lucille [D]
No CA-35 Waters, Maxine [D]
No CA-36 Hahn, Janice [D]
No CA-38 Napolitano, Grace [D]
No CA-40 Royce, Edward [R]
No CA-46 Rohrabacher, Dana [R]
No CA-48 Campbell, John [R]

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=h2011-932

I am grateful that the primary is non-partisan, because partisan labels “Democrat” and “Republican” now mean nothing except that third-party candidates are doomed. The “top two” selection process without a primary and runoff is ALSO unfairly stacked against the outside, but we shall see whether the number of ordinary Californians (in the tens of millions) can recognize their common grounds and identify with me. I call out to everyone who has been defrauded of their vested contractual rights their homes, their jobs, and their property, defeated in every court and administrative proceeding, and dispossessed of all their rights, title, and interest in life, liberty, and property….and so consistently defeated and frustrated for a very long time in their pursuit of happiness…of the American Dream— I call out to everyone with a family member now or recently in jail, on probation, or under investigation…. I call out to everyone who used to be one of the “haves” and is now a “have not”, or who has never been invited to the table of prosperity at all, to join me in fighting for the end of deceit, lies, and prevarication as policies of governmental manipulation and control. We must divest the banks and the corporations of their controlling positions in society and thus destroy the military-industrial-financial complex which has made government subservient to the few rather than the many. In particular, we must take American land and jobs off the world market—to be bought and sold into slavery by massive foreign interests with no commitment to freedom or democracy, and to restore American productivity. Let them scream in Beijing and Shanghai, Mumbai, Islamabad, Calcutta, Bangkok, and Singapore, calling us “isolationists” and “protectionists” and we will know that we are on the road toward being a happy and prosperous nation again. Let us learn from the disaster in Europe and start dismantling our Central Banking system and abolish fiat currency and reckless credit regimes before they together flatten and wreck us. Let us restore private property to our people and so replace welfare slavery with independence as the primary way of life. Let us even accept that we will all have to work harder, be poorer, and use our minds with more discipline and vigor if we are ever really to be free and stand upright to each other as citizens and to the world again. And in relation to the world, let us indeed “leave them alone.” If Sharia law is the will of the people in Amman, Algiers, Baghdad, Benghazi, Cairo, Damascus, Khartoum, Tehran, Tripoli, and Tunisia, let those people have their way. We will leave them alone and they will leave us alone—I have no doubt of it! Good fences make good neighbors so long as the dogs of war don’t jump over them….and so long as we control ours, I believe they will control theirs. “Terrorism”, as it has been analyzed and applied in the past twenty years, really DOES begin at home you know….
http://www.corbettreport.com/911-a-conspiracy-theory/

The Death of the Constitution: Structure of Government (are Articles I, II, and III COMPLETELY MEANINGLESS)

Bank of America Consent Order 11-029-B-HC 04-13-2011

What has happened to the three part division of functions and separation of powers of the Federal Government in the Constitution?  Article I: Legislative, Article II: Executive, Article III: Judiciary.  The above linked and attached “Consent Order” is issued in the name of the “UNITED STATES OF AMERICA” like any Article III judicial court, but the Court that issued it is the “BOARD OF GOVERNORS OF THE FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM, WASHINGTON, D.C.”.   This was all news to me: the Federal Reserve Board of Governors Acts as a Court and has its own Docket of cases, decisions of which have the force and effect of law?

The Federal Reserve System’s structure consists, at the top, of the presidentially appointed Board of Governors (or Federal Reserve Board) and the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC). There are twelve regional Federal Reserve Banks located in major cities throughout the nation (A = Boston, B = New York, C= Philadelphia, D = Cleveland, E = Richmond, F = Atlanta, G = Chicago, H = St. Louis, I = Minneapolis, J = Kansas City, K = Dallas, L = San Francisco—note the close coordination between these Federal Reserve Banks and the 9 U.S. Circuit Courts of Appeal 1 = Boston, 2 = New York, 3 = Philadelphia, 4 = Richmond, 5 = New Orleans (Dallas), 6 = Cincinnati (Cleveland), 7 = Chicago, 8 = Minneapolis, 9 = San Francisco).  At the bottom of the hierarchy there are numerous privately owned U.S. member banks and various advisory councils.

The Federal Open Market Committee takes nominal (but never “legal”) responsibility for setting monetary policy.  This “FOMC” consists of all seven members of the Board of Governors and the twelve regional bank presidents, though only five bank presidents vote at any given time (one wonders whether this is to diffuse any personal or legal liability for setting any particular policy?).  The Federal Reserve System has both private and public components, and was designed to serve the interests of both the general public and private bankers.

The result is a structure that is unique among central banks (indeed, among any kind of corporate or political hierarchy at all).  The Federal Reserve Banking System differs from all others (of England/UK, France, Germany, Italy for instance) in that an entity outside of the central bank, namely the United States Department of the Treasury, creates the currency used—again, this appears to be a stratagem to diffuse responsibility and liability.  HOW IS ANY OF THIS EVEN REMOTELY CONSISTENT WITH THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION?

According to the Board of Governors, the Federal Reserve “acts independently  within the government” in that “its monetary policy decisions do not have to be approved by the President or anyone else in the executive or legislative branches of government.” The authority of the Federal Reserve Banking System derives from statutes enacted by the U.S. Congress and the System is subject to congressional oversight. Like members of the President’s Cabinet, Article III Judges, and Ambassadors to Foreign Nations, the members of the Board of Governors, including its chairman and vice-chairman, come to office only when nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate.

The government also exercises some nominal (or is it actual and total?) control over the Federal Reserve by appointing and setting the salaries of the system’s highest-level employees. Thus the Federal Reserve retains both private and public aspects. The U.S. Government receives all of the system’s annual profits, after a statutory dividend of 6% on member banks’ capital investment is paid, and an account surplus is maintained. In 2010, the Federal Reserve made a profit of $82 billion and transferred $79 billion to the U.S. Treasury.

What is amazing here is that, the way I see it, the REAL power triangle of the Federal Government is NOT Article I Legislative, Article II Executive, and Article III Judiciary, but Federal Reserve Board, Internal Revenue Service, and Social Security Administration.  

EACH of these “independent, quasi-governmental” entities set their own regulation by publication in the daily issued “Federal Register” (codified in the Code of Federal Regulations or “CFR”) and they make these regulations under “general” grants of authority by Congress and subject to the “general” supervision of Congress, the President, and the Courts.  (All three Constitutional Branches of government are at least NOMINALLY empowered to supervise the “extra-constitutional” branches of government).  

But each “extra-constitutional” branch of government also as enforcement (i.e. executive) powers and ITS OWN INTERNAL ADMINISTRATIVE COURTS (governed by Title 5 of the United States Code and the “Administrative Procedure Act”, among other provisions of the U.S. Code such as Title 12 for Banking, Title 15 for Commerce, and the vast Title 42 for “Public Health and Welfare”—which also, bizarrely enough, includes not only Social Security but Civil Rights, and the completely extra-constitutional and “liberty inconsistent” mandates for Environmental Regulation and Control over the Family and Probate Law systems of each state).

Where are the Senators and Congressmen and State Legislators trying to bring this behemoth within the Constitution again?  Why are high school students not taught that the three part system of REAL (DE FACTO) government in this Country consists of the Federal Reserve System, the Internal Revenue Commission, and the Social Security Administration under the Commissioner of Social Security and the Department of Health & Human Services? 

How do nullificationists and “Tenthers” (including my friends Michael Boldin and Bryce Shonka at the wonderful Tenth Amendment Center here in Los Angeles, actually expect to restore power to the states when the states are directly complicit in this constitutional breakdown and are constantly feeding at the unconstitutional troughs of general revenue and social security? (See my “white paper”: WHEN THE VALID PUBLIC DEBT IS QUESTIONED CONGRESS MUST ANSWER CEL 08-09-2011—arguing among other things that the States expressly consented to abrogate their own sovereignty with contractual finality when they accepted Social Security; and OUTLINE FOR COMPLAINT—Draft 08-17-2011 (Legislative Immunity was abolished by the Fourteenth Amendment where the Validity Public Debt is Questioned).  I had the privilege of speaking at the February 2010 Tenth Amendment Center Conference in Atlanta last year, and I asked this question to an audience of States Rights Advocates—and they had no answer…… it was discouraging….

The American People need to reclaim their control over the government, and by definition, a government entirely outside of the Constitution is entirely beyond the control of the people. The three-part division of government between the Federal Reserve System, the IRS and Commissioner of Internal Revenue, and the Social Security Administration and its own phony “Board of Trustees” which is just as fake as the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System as a pretense of responsible administration of powers) is as oppressive as it is fraudulent, and it is inimical to a Democratic-Republican form of government.  

Is this the culture we deserve?  I think not.

If you would like to help the fight for “corny old values” like Truth, Justice, and the American Way, for Family, Home, and Freedom, and to add one Senator for the Bill of Rights and against Indefinite Detention, against the PATRIOT ACT, and against the use of United States Troops in this Country against its own citizens, please support Charles Edward Lincoln, III, for U.S. Senator from California.  We are fighting one of the most entrenched establishment seats in Congress—Dianne Feinstein who tried to make cosmetic changes in S.B. 1867 to hide and disguise its truly oppressive nature (and to claim she had “done the best she could”, perhaps?)—and we ask you to send your check or money order to Lincoln-for-Senate 2012 to Charles Edward Lincoln, III, 952 Gayley Avenue, #143, Los Angeles, California 90024.  Call 310-773-6023 for more information.