Tag Archives: U.S. Constitution

Jerry O’Neil: Are you willing to give up your freedoms to big government? August 7

Posted: Sunday, August 7, 2016 9:00 am
By JERRY O’NEIL | 0 comments
Do you want a one-world government? Would it lead to world peace if the United States surrendered our sovereignty to a global government? Or does an all-powerful government always lead to genocide as happened in China under Mao, Russia under Stalin, Germany under Hitler, and Cambodia under Pol Pot?
While I understand the longing for peace in our time, I am against a tyrannous global government. Let us at least keep the freedoms we have protected under the First and Second Amendments of the United States Constitution. George Soros, Gov. Bullock, Sen. Tester, Common Cause and the Montana Public Interest Research Group are associated with Stand with Montanans, A Project of Common Cause Montana, and they are taking actions to repeal the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. Their proposed repeal is at: https://movetoamend.org/wethepeopleamendment.
4560729 Asse Western Region Instory (copy)Snappy’s SparkNWMT Fair 250×300
If this group is successful in their attempt to amend the Constitution, I believe our freedoms of speech, press and association will become:
“Congress shall make no law … abridging the freedom of speech of the individual, or of the government approved press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble as long as they do not use their collective resources for political purposes, and to individually petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”
They would also include in their amendment a provision to prohibit or limit candidates spending their own money on their campaigns, thus making it so the town drunk would receive as much campaign funding as the resourceful and sober candidate.
On June 23, I attended a meeting of over 200 people at the University of Montana Law School meeting room in Missoula. Jeff Clements, President of American Promise and co-founder of Free Speech for People chaired the presentation.
I asked Mr. Clements if the We The People Amendment would reinstate the McCain-Feingold Campaign Reform Law that limited broadcast ads mentioning an opposing candidate within 30 days of a primary or 60 days of a general election? I also asked if it would bar the NRA from sending out their postcards endorsing pro-gun candidates?
Some other questions I was prepared to ask him regarding the effects of their proposed amendment to the Constitution included:
— Will churches have to register with the government if they organize their congregation to lobby against abortions?
— Will the We The People Amendment make it illegal for corporations to own newspapers with which they can publish political editorials and endorsements prior to elections like the Copper Kings’ newspapers did before the advent of TV?
His answer to these questions was, “We will have to pass the amendment to the Constitution before we can find out the answers to these types of questions.”
One desire for many of the 200 people in the conference room is to overturn the decision in Citizens United v. FEC. That decision overturned the McCain-Feingold Act and permitted Citizens United, a non-profit group, to assemble together and publish a video expose of Hillary Clinton that would air within 30 days of an election.
Maybe that is why Hillary Clinton has publicly stated that if she is president, whether through Supreme Court appointments or constitutional amendments, she will overturn Citizens United.
I used to wonder how in so many countries around the world the people were persuaded to give up their freedoms without a fight. I now see how it is done. In 2012 the citizens of Montana agreed to remove the constitutional protections protecting our freedoms of speech, press, association and petition when they passed I-166 with a 75 percent majority.
I-166 was sold to the public on the catch phrase, “Corporations are not people,” but its ultimate effect will be to destroy the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution if the “moderate Republicans” and Democrats who met at the law school get their way.
Are we willing to limit the people’s rights and help the globalists institute a one-world government?
O’Neil is a resident of Columbia Falls and former Republican legislator.


EVERYONE can create (“originate”) their own money (“banknotes”), if licensed by the Federal Government? Even a Rutgers Basketball Coach?

This is a part of the Federal statute that regulates “individual” promissory note originators:

12 U.S. Code § 5103 – License or registration required (a) In general

Subject to the existence of a licensing or registration regime, as the case may be, an individual may not engage in the business of a loan originator without first—
(1) obtaining, and maintaining annually—

(A) a registration as a registered loan originator; or
(B) a license and registration as a State-licensed loan originator; and
(2) obtaining a unique identifier.
(b) Loan processors and underwriters

(1) Supervised loan processors and underwriters

A loan processor or underwriter who does not represent to the public, through advertising or other means of communicating or providing information (including the use of business cards, stationery, brochures, signs, rate lists, or other promotional items), that such individual can or will perform any of the activities of a loan originator shall not be required to be a State-licensed loan originator.
(2) Independent contractors

An independent contractor may not engage in residential mortgage loan origination activities as a loan processor or underwriter unless such independent contractor is a State-licensed loan originator.

SECURITIZED CREDIT ORIGINATION?11-05-2014 Kennedy v Stringer Original Complaint USDC DNJ

(4)          Plaintiff Melvene Lynn Kennedy is the owner of a restaurant facility (currently closed, non-operational) called “Uncle Seas”, located at 879 Springfield in Irvington, New Jersey, executed a promissory note payable to C. Vivian Stringer, as described in a complaint filed on behalf of C. Vivian Stringer by Peter J. Hendricks on or about June 7, 2013.
(5)           Plaintiff has sought proof, which has been repeatedly denied and refused, in the state Court proceedings, that the C. Vivian Stringer had or has any rights of ownership and/or enforceability of the promissory note, which appears to have been processed through the First Baptist Church of Lincoln Gardens, in Somerset, New Jersey, Senior Pastor “Buster” Soaries, and a coordinate and related pair of institutions CDC Properties and Central Jersey Development Corporation (http://cjcdc.org/affiliates.php), both operating in fact under Federal Banking and Community Development Law, but masquerading as a personal act of monetary assistance based on friendship rather than commerce.
(6)           Plaintiff Melvene Lynn Kennedy agreed to the interest rate of 18%, in whole or in part because of the special trust and confidence which she reposed in her long-time sports coach and mentor, Defendant C. Vivian Stringer; Kennedy
alleges that this interest rate was unlawful for a federally guaranteed and secured
loan, that further that it was unfair, inequitable, and unconscionable in any legal or equitable sense, as was the entire transaction, being based on fraud, “false identities” and deceit.
(7)      Plaintiff executed a mortgage in favor of C. Vivian Stringer, at Stringer’s request and direction, but in coordination with the First Baptist Church of Lincoln Gardens. Plaintiff sought in State Court has never been allowed to see any evidence of whether the money came from C. Vivian Stringer, but the check appears to have issued either by the First Baptist Church of Lincoln Gardens or else CDC Properties or else Central Jersey Community Development Corporation.  Plaintiff asks, how does this make C. Vivian Stringer a creditor entitled to foreclose? What is her injury standing? Plaintiff alleges that C. Vivian Stringer has no standing but merely a status, a de facto, or even de jure, title of nobility namely, as an “individual originator of credit.”
(8)               Plaintiff ’s promissory note was never filed with the Court, in violation of New Jersey Law, at the time of the initiation of the foreclosure. Plaintiff believes that C. Vivian Stringer never owned or managed the underlying note or mortgage at any time after closing on May 7, 2010, and that her June 7, 2013 suit for foreclosure was fraudulently filed, and constitutes a conspiracy, with the other defendants, to effect a theft by false pretenses, under color of New Jersey Court Procedures and Federal Banking and Credit Law.
The New Jersey Foreclosure Process
(9)       Foreclosure Litigation in New Jersey, under the New Jersey Fair Foreclosure Act (FFA) and related statutes, begins with a Notice of Intent to Foreclose which precedes the filing of a formal judicial complaint for foreclosure. The Statutory Notice of Intent to Foreclose requires essentially the same standards of disclosure and provision of information than State Rules of Court, but in practice, the New Jersey Superior Courts waive most of the formal “proof of ownership” requirements, as they have in this case.  12-19-2014 Kennedy v Stringer Docket Report Showing Stringer MTD filed 12-17-2014

HISTORICAL CONTEXT AND BACKGROUND (Originally published on this blog May 27, 2009, 23:27:29 PM)

        Paper “banknote” money is, of course, NOT expressly authorized by the United States Constitution, in fact, arguably, it is specifically forbidden by Article I, Section 10 that ” No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts….”  The purpose of paper money (“emitting Bills of Credit”) is and has always been to create easy and quick credit for the FEDERAL government.  This Country was created in large part by the issuance of Fiat Money—the Continental Dollar, which gave rise to one of the earliest sarcastic currency jokes still “in circulation” as part of the English language, “That’s Not Worth a Continental.”

Banks can do the same thing by “originating promissory notes”, “emitting credit” or “approving credit”—and all promissory notes accepted by National Banking Institutions under the definitions of 12 U.S.C. §1813(l) MUST treat approved promissory notes as “the equivalent of cash.”  In effect, any person who can approve credit formally can create money from thin air.

National Banking Associations do that, but a former associate of mine, the well-known Orange County Dentist Dr. Orly Taitz, was able to approve credit through her Dental Office, and upon accepting notes, was able to issue herself money.  She actually DID this in the case of my friend the late (died tragically and very prematurely last December) Major Stefan Frederick Cook….. who never came anywhere near Orly’s dental office….but sought Orly’s “legal” services…. and she had him apply for credit through her dental office.  She never, however, got him into a dental chair so far as I am aware….although he may have felt his teeth had all been extracted by the time his little whirlwind tour with her was over….  I have the greatest respect and regard for Major Stefan Frederick Cook, and I am sorry that Orly’s impetuosity (and my assistance  to her in acting impetuously) may have injured his amazing military career unnecessarily, but that is a different story for a different day: the point is that issuing credit under the national system, whether you are a Bank or a retailer or a retail provider of dental services or anything else: IS the creation of money from thin air.  Creating money from thin air facilitates instant gratification of the kinds and types of which both Henry Ford and Sigmund Freud definitely and enthusiastically approved, albeit for radically different reasons.  Aldous Huxley made the connexion between Ford and Freud’s attitude towards instant gratification in his masterpiece “Sci Fi Horror” book: Brave New World.

       “The Money Multiplier” effect is something that ever student of Freshman economics learns about and then forgets in later life as s/he goes through a normal American life-style creating money by signing credit card notes, mortgages, car loans, EACH of which is multiplied several times within a month or two at the maximum, thereby creating the oversupply of money which that same student of Freshman economics will doubtless hear of on the news, possibly during his middle age, as “inflation” measured by the “consumer price index.”  Gold and silver are not immune from inflation: during historical gold and silver rushes the value of these commodities has shrunk to unbelievably low levels in mining communities and areas where they are super-abundant.  Spain of the “Golden Age” (16th-17th centuries) is often said to have been crippled in comparison with Holland, Germany, and Great Britain by the inflationary effect of vast surplus gold derived from the post-Columbian conquests of Mexico, Peru, Colombia, and Bolivia.  Why develop?  Why produce anything at all when you can stay drunk on easy gold and never have to work?

Why develop just and fair economic and political systems when you can decorate your churches with oceans of gold and then leave them in charge of regulating society and culture through well-funded courts of inquisition who are responsible to no one?  Money = power, power corrupts, and abundant money = absolute power which can corrupt absolutely.  These truisms are too well known to bear much discussion.

         “Formal” market economies have always depended upon an exchange rate based on some form of central commodities.  Before gold and silver the Ancient Romans and Germans used horses and cattle as currency (the word “pecuniary”, meaning, “of or relating to money” is derived from Latin “pecus”—preserved in Spanish words and phrases such as “Agropecuario”—which means “relating to commercial farms and ranches and similar products and services”).

         Among the ancient Aztec and Maya of Mexico, Cacao beans and cotton cloth were used as currency, (this was the sweetest economy in history, where money literally did “grow on trees” and could be made into chocolate at any time).  And in fact the Southern Americans of the Confederate States of America effectively tried (but failed) to use cotton as currency again in the 1860s, but were rebuffed by and ultimately lost their bid for independence as a result of the scorn heaped on them by gold-loving British and French bankers of the middle part of the 19th century.  Thus “Dixie” fell in large part because of its dependence on paper money such as the “Dix Dollars” (Ten Dollar–French language) bill issued by the antebellum Banque de Nouvelle Orleans which had given the region its nickname in the time leading up to secession in 1860-61.  Cowerie shells were famously used by certain pre-modern tribes in the Western Pacific.  The honest advantage of commodity based currencies—and their fatal flaw, from the standpoint of modern social-welfare economics—is that they are inevitably finite.

            No matter how easy it is to pan for gold, grow cotton, raise cattle, or cacao beans, or collect cowerie shells, it cannot be done instantaneously.  And for governments (like the U.S.) which want to build sophisticated nuclear missiles, launch satellites, sponsor vast educational programs which seem to lower the overall national levels of literacy and awareness, try through redistribution of the wealth to make “every man a king”, and generally realize Rumpelstiltskin’s dream of spinning straw into gold without actually doing the work of spinning even, paper money is the only “commodity” sufficiently malleable and manipulable to work.

Oh Cursed Spite, that ever I was born to set it right…..(To run or not to run, that was the question)….

Whether ’tis nobler in the mind to suffer
The slings and arrows of outrageous commie-pinko pundits, critics, and general lowlife lowbrows,
Or to take arms against the sea of troubles which they and their ilk have created,
And by opposing (at least attempt) to end them (or at least curtail their influence and power…).
“Everybody knows that the system’s rotten: old black Joe’s still a pickin’ cotton for your ribbons and bows, as everybody knows.” (Leonard Cohen);
Ich bin der Geist der stets verneint, Und das mit Recht; denn alles, was entsteht, Ist wert, daß es zugrunde geht.”
(Johann Wolfgang von Goethe)
So this is where I am in life.  I am going to be 50 years old in April (time is definitely out of joint).  I have no significant accomplishments to speak of except a Ph.D. dissertation I wrote at Harvard which was accepted for publication but, because I wanted to polish it up and update it, never got published and as of the present time is so totally out of date that it is no longer publishable.  I have had dozens of ideas for books which I never wrote more than an outline for.

Oh, I also got a J.D. from the University of Chicago and worked with and for a couple of Federal Judges as a Judicial Extern and Judicial Law Clerk, but I never could stand the billable hours routine at law firms or, for that matter, even the 9-5 routine at a normal job.  I wanted to be on my own.  And so I was for a few years in Texas, “on my own” as an attorney-and-counsellor-at law, but apparently even that was too much normative conformity for me—because the moment I started taking some interesting and “righteous” civil rights cases, as opposed to mere commercial litigation, real estate, and bankruptcy, I found myself under attack and then, within 3 years, forced “to resign in lieu of discipline” after having been convicted of the heinous felony of mis-stating two digits of my social security number on an otherwise complete and correct application to open a non-interest bearing checking account at Wells Fargo.

Harvard didn’t want me back at that point (2000) although I went, stayed a couple of months at the Faculty Club on Quincy near the Fogg Art Museum, did some privately sponsored research, and asked.  Things had changed.  A return to academics was just not in the cards for me.  Again, the problem of being significantly more of a “maverick” than Sarah Palin ever dreamed of being in her worst nightmares (a Palinesque big wink wouldn’t look so good over my bloodshot eyes tonight, and to think SHE’S four years younger than I am…).

Listlessly, after nearly dying on Zamalek Island in Cairo, Egypt after a common mugging/head injury sustained on November 30, 2000, I returned to Texas for no particularly good reason except I had a wife and 8 year old son waiting for me there.  I had gotten divorced from my wife once in February 1999 but was already back together with her—reunited, oddly enough, by the mere fact of being indicted on preposterous charges in December 1999—she was a real hero to me at that point in my life.

But that didn’t last long and in less than a year-and-a-half after surviving attempted murder in Egypt my wife and I were on very bad terms again.  Things had seemed OK for a while.  I had done a little teaching at Austin Community College (I was driving from Cedar Park to the Pinnacle Campus to teach a section in History on September 11, 2001—only listening to Wagnerian Opera and not the radio I was puzzled when I got on the elevator and everyone was in worried/panic mode).

In July 2002, my wife and I broke up again, what I didn’t know was that it was going to be for the last time.  We haven’t been back together since.  Initially I had custody of our son Charlie, but it was at that point that my real odyssey, and what I have concluded was my real purpose in life, really began.   I am who I am today because of Judge Michael Jergins of the 395th Judicial District Court in and for Williamson County, Texas.  I had for a long time seen evidence and suspected that Texas Family Court judges disregarded both the Texas and United States Constitutions, but it was only when I learned the customs, practices, and policies of Judge Michael Jergins and his acolytes J. Randall Grimes, Laurie J. Nowlin, and Michael P. Davis, and started getting in touch with other parents/family court victims, especially one Rhonde Malmquist nee Moe, that I realized that I was, in Georgetown, Williamson County, at the epicenter of something much bigger than the stupid police brutality and callous treatment of personal liberty and property intertests which I had encountered in Lago Vista.  If the Lago Vista police were like highly localized tornados going through people’s houses occasionally, the Family Law Courts in Williamson County, and by extension the entire Family Court system in Texas, as a stagnate hurricane sitting in place with a radius 200-500 miles in every direction emanating from the Attorney General’s (Greg Abbott’s) offices in Austin.  Texas is a big place, and the wealth redistributing-family destroying Texas Family Court was an enterprise engaged in and affecting interstate commerce which constituted the biggest “racket” I had ever seen.  And so I dedicated my life, my fortune, and my sacred honor to fighting the Constitutional perversions which are the Family Code and Family Court system of Texas.

To make a long story short, that occupied almost all my time and energy from July 2002-April 2006.  I made some great temporary alliances during that time which should have lasted longer.  But the simple truth is that by May 2006 it was all over.  There was nothing more that I could or wanted to try to do.  And my son was starting to show some signs of breaking away without judicial assistance, although the final breakthrough didn’t really happen until August 2007, by which time I had already decided to leave Texas, where I basically had been stripped of all my civil rights in January 2006, even before Judge Walter Smith’s order of March 2008 banning me even from ever filing in the Texas Federal Courts again—I was already living in Florida by then, after a few exciting incidents which I have described in the “about” section of this blog….https://charleslincoln3.wordpress.com/about. Oh yes, and during these same years I had also met and gotten to know and admire one Montana State Senator Jerry O’Neil, who has dedicated his life to fighting the state-sponsored monopoly over the practice of law.  Jerry has become one of my models in life.  I admire him more every time I look at his work, his persistence, and see him continue on.  For me, Jerry O’Neil “veritate gladiator arena publicae unus est”  (He is a true [professional] swordsman in the public arena) and I think I should be more like him: turning my own bad experiences into a crusade to make the world a better place.  He is somehow at the same time ethical, practical, and politically successful by setting modest goals.  I only question why he has set his goals QUITE so modestly, because I think he could be at least as great a force in the United States today as Ron Paul if he were to TAKE the national stage.

So now here I am, half a century old and dedicating my life to fighting yet another major fight on behalf of the underdogs of the world: a fight against mortgage foreclosure nationwide.   I have some cases right now that are more promising than before.   I have in these past 13 years since the 4th of July, 1997, parade in front of my former office on Dawn Drive in Lago Vista learned so much about the corruption of the court system, the government generally, and above all the monetary system and economy, that I wonder how I have ever avoided going into politics—not to serve the system as it exists but to scrap it.

On the one hand, if I run for public office, I will suffer much more of the same kind of garbage slander and attacks that I have experienced since first becoming involved with a certain Moldavan-born, Israeli-educated, Orange County Dentist named Dr. Orly Taitz, D.D.S., Esquire.  I wish I had never met her, except that I never would have come to live since September 2009 by the beach in San Clemente if it hadn’t been for her, and San Clemente, California is one of the most beautiful and satisfying places on earth—and God only knows I’ve lived and traveled all over the United States, the Americas, and Europe and the adjacent the Mediterranean areas of Asia and Africa.  The only other possible advantage of having met Dr. Taitz last year is that perhaps I had my little retarded “sex scandal” episode before I was running for office, rather than after or during the process…..

If I can arrange it, I will always call San Clemente home from now on, and never live far from the Pacific beach again.  Oddly enough, this was my dream when I was in High School at the Hollywood Professional School (aka Hollywood Conservatory of Music & the Arts)—to live by the Pacific beach—except back then it was to live in Malibu—which is now way too crowded and expensive and the traffic much too heavy.  But San Clemente is like a combination of the Santa Monica and Malibu of 35-40 years ago: just urbane enough to have lots of good restaurants and shops all within walking distance of the water, with a fine view of Santa Catalina Island offshore.  In short, I have found my Shangri-La, and have lived there listening to the waves longer than most people dare to dream of doing.  Yes, I owe it all to the combined efforts of Orly Taitz and Steven D. Silverstein: her witless, naive, almost childlike incompetence, and his vicious and intentionally and expressly sharklike corruption and thievery.

During the past six months, also, however, I have realized that the California system of non-judicial foreclosure is an almost insuperable barrier to the security of home-ownership and private property.  In essence, California has already outlawed private property.  A combination of inflationary economics, an irresistable socio-cultural pressure always to expand and consume more and more and more, and a lack of attachment to place or fundamental respect for the concepts of home, family place, privacy, and real, long-term ownership, have all conspired to make California residences temporary and the California economy largely nomadic or transitory.   And the corporate infrastructure supports the socio-political superstructures of the courts and legal profession and financial institutions which are dedicated to wiping the family, private property, and all other remnants of the bourgeois state OFF THE MAP.

One common feature in the corruption of the Family Code and Court system in Texas, Florida, and California, and the mortgage finance customs and practices everywhere in the United States it seems, is that Federal economic and monetary policies can be found as the driving forces underlying any statutory or customary scheme of business practices or social policies.  The boundary between state and federal has become blurred.

My first thought was to run for Governor of California (“Terminator” and nominal Republican but de-facto socialist Arnold Schwarzenegger has presided over the most complete economic collapse of any state together with its government since the Great Depression of the 1930s—an unworthy heir to Governor Ronald Reagan he has proved to be indeed…..).  But it was pointed out to me that there is a five year residency requirement, and that at least one state, North Dakota, had previously, in 1937, removed by judicial mandate a governor who was elected in spite of his lack of five years residence.  This was the case of Thomas Moodie, elected in 1934-5.  State of North Dakota v Thomas H Moodie 1937

Since my association with Dr. Orly Taitz, DDS, Esquire was predicated in part on misguided personal emotions and in part on a shared distaste for the current de facto President of the United States, Barack Hussein Obama, and since our outward expression of dissatisfaction for Obama was our complaint that he was not a “natural born” American citizen and hence not constitutionally qualified to serve as President—given all these circumstances I have decided it would be best not to run for governor and risk becoming a historical footnote on the order of Thomas H. Moodie.  I know nothing about Moodie but I doubt he was anything like Obama, who is every bit as American as King Kong but not half so honest nor articulate nor generally sympathetic and likeable….and in the implementation of national policies is much clumsier (perhaps one should say “clunkier”) and much more destructive….  Obama was elected for one and only one reason: the Country couldn’t stand another minute under Bush or anyone who looked even remotely like him, which, ironically enough, John McCain, whom Bush had politically though not physically assassinated in 2000, looked significantly more like Bush than Obama, and Sarah Palin, rightly or wrongly, seemed extraordinary only in that she MIGHT have constituted an intellectual step DOWN from George W…..if that’s possible…. which it really and truly might not be….

But in any event, it does seem that although I am constitutionally disqualified for running for California Governor because I have not resided there continuously for five years, I AM eligible to run for and yes, even to serve as a United States Senator.

If I were to run, I know I would stand little or no chance of winning.  I will not be able to raise millions in campaign funds, or at least I cannot see how I would or even could, and California is the most populous state in the Union.

Yet on the other hand, I might be a good candidate.  Californians pride themselves on being trendsetters for the nation, always ahead and iconoclastic, at the same time as they set up the icons that everyone else follows.  California is ethnically diverse and I’m rather distinctively WASPY, but I was confirmed at All Saints Church in Beverly Hills, which is a good place to be a certified WASP if ever there was one.  I’m also a WASP who speaks Spanish fluently, having lived and worked on and off in Mexico, Honduras, Belize, Colombia, Puerto Rico, and elsewhere in Latin America on and off for the 15 years I was involved in archaeology (1976-1991).  And even in my “fall” from establishmentarian grace I think I might have something real to offer Californians:  California has the highest prison population in the United States, one of the highest incarceration rates in the world (per capita/population wide) and it has to stop.

I spent most of my 54 days in Federal Custody at MDC Los Angeles, and so I became acquainted with the evils of the Federal and State prisons in modern times.  I have often said I am grateful, even thankful, for that experience, for that journey into America’s own Heart of Darkness, and it changed my life forever.  Never again will I believe that this is a truly fair, free, or just country, or that the mass incarceration of over 1% of the adult population is anything but a catastrophic indictment of what used to be called SERIOUSLY (and not just in our National Anthem) “the land of the free and the home of the brave.”  Only a cowardly nation of quivering slaves would incarcerate so many for so little reason.  The largest single group (by raw number of persons) in Federal custody is composed of Hispanics on various sorts of immigration crimes.   This is a scandal, because everywhere Hispanics are enthusiastically employed without regard to legal status.  HYPOCRISY!  Yet so many of my fellow whites are scornful and fearful of people “with a record.”  I regard all the legal insults which have been leveled against me as “red badges of courage” and I would like to educate my fellow whites, and improve the self-image and esteem of those groups hit harder with prison and penal sanctions generally.

So why should I NOT run for Governor in this diverse state of California, and tell the oppressed classes that I am one of them, and that I would like to lead them all out of the present authoritarian disaster into a better world.  It might be that some sort of political empowerment through separation would be necessary to give blocks of power back to the hispanic and black people of America.  I have spent a lot of time thinking about this, but in effect, socio-cultural policies of “diversity” and “social integration” amount either to voluntary or enforced loss of identity for everyone.  If “Black is Beautiful”, maybe black should stay black and empowerment of groups will strengthen identities and senses of worth and well-being.  One of my many pet peeves against Barack Obama is that he was elected in large part as the first “black” President, but in form, function, and effect he is about as “black” as his running mate Joe Biden or his Secretary of State and former adversary Hillary Clinton—Obama’s Kenyan heritage and possibly de jure Kenyan citizenship being the only really “African” thing about this graduate of Columbia and Harvard who taught at the University of Chicago and speaks with no accent of any kind.

But in addition, I have become aware of so many problems in Federal Welfare and Social Security Law which have become the guiding lights of socially targeted wealth-redistribution and family destabilization programs in America. The mortgage finance and family code/court disasters I mentioned above all trace their origins back to Federal Law regarding monetary finance and social security.

So should I run for Senate?  I am thinking hard about it.  In one sense I would rather be governor, but there’s basically noplace where I have been a steady resident for the past five years: Texas, Massachusetts, California, Florida, Montana, Louisiana and British Columbia—in about that order too—each of these places has a claim on my recent residence/citizenship Identity.  During the past year it’s ONLY been Texas, Florida, Massachusetts, and California (OK, one weekend in Montana….hardly counts, oh, almost forgot, a couple of weeks in Connecticut, a couple of days in Philadelphia, St. Louis, New York City, and Georgia).  The past few months in San Clemente have been very pleasant—I COULD settle down there, even though I haven’t quite done so yet….

If I were to run for office, my platform would run something like this which I wrote up while thinking about running for Governor, before I realized the residence requirement barriers….):

Platform Planks for Constitutional Reform:


(1)            Constitutional Courts:          All judicial decisions concerning the life, liberty, or property of individuals shall be made only by juries of 12 persons, all of whom, before being impaneled as jurors, shall prove that they are literate and able to pass an examination on the Constitution, laws, and history of the United States and one state.

(2)            Constitutional Juries:         All judicial decisions concerning the validity of laws or governmental actions of any kind shall be supported by jury findings concerning matters of fact in support of or against the laws.

(3)            Constitutional Judges:         No judge nor any other court officer shall ever enjoy immunity from the law for any action aside from rendering or enforcing decisions necessary to decide cases properly submitted to and decided by juries; this is the proper application of “absolute” judicial immunity—it is “absolute” only when reconciled by a judge as conforming with the constitution and laws being applied and the judge’s opinion shall be the measure of his conformity.

(4)            Constitutional Executives:          No prosecuting attorney or any other executive officer shall enjoy any immunity from any action aside from reasonably applying or enforcing the law of the land according to the Constitution of the United States and to the law of the state in which they are employed; this is the proper application of “qualified” executive immunity—it is qualified by a jury’s assessment of reasonable compliance with the Constitution and laws of the relevant jurisdiction.



(5)            No state or federal government shall license or grant a monopoly concerning any kind of human activity or behavior except for the enactment and modification of laws, enforceable in the courts of any individual state or the Federal Union.

(6)            Marriage, Law, and the ability of the people to defend themselves against all enemies, including the government: In particular, all licenses or state monopolistic practices concerning marriage, speech or expression concerning the law, sometimes known as “the practice of law”, and or restricting or limiting the private ownership of firearms, weapons, and personal property of any kind (including alcohol and drugs) are abolished and shall not be resuscitated under the guise of “regulation” or “public welfare prohibition” for any reason (but personal liability for the sale or prescription of harmful drugs shall forever be unlimited).

(7)            The States and Federal government may make laws reasonably regulating any species of human activity not constituting a fundamental right enumerated in the Bill of Rights, so long as no license or de facto monopoly is implied or created, and such laws reasonably regulating human activities are enforceable ONLY in the constitutional courts of the land—and no administrative courts without juries shall ever be erected or maintained by any state or the Federal government.

(8)            Fundamental rights include freedom of speech and of religion, broadly defined, the ownership of land and things as private property, free from government rents, including all manner of private expressive or associative conduct within the home or family.

(9)            No person shall be deprived of life or physical liberty for any activity concerning commerce, but all failures, frauds, deceits, and trickery shall be punishable according to sentences imposed by juries under the guidance of constitutional judges, and these offenses of failure, fraud, deceits, and trickery may result in debts extending to and collectible from a perpetrator’s family and associates which limit an individual’s associative, expressive, or economic liberty or commercial activities, including the right to own or acquire property except on behalf of victims of failures, frauds, deceits, and trickery, and may also result in banishment from a community and exile from the jurisdiction of a state or the Federal union.

(10)        Juries may also impose sentences of corporal or capital punishment or deprivation of physical liberty where commensurate with the offenses committed.

(11)        Prior to trial, persons accused of any sort of wrongdoing may be reasonably restrained in their physical liberty to preserve the jurisdiction of the courts, but such restraint shall be subject to the supervision of citizen juries empanelled to supervise all prisons and jails and systems of physical restraint.

(12)        Corporate and professional immunity of every kind is abolished.  The commercial and business advantages of pooling wealth or talent shall never again be allowed to interfere, as a matter of state or federal law, with the power of juries to find or assess individual responsibility against corporate owners, operators, directors, or employees, according to the facts as juries shall hear and decide them under the guidance of constitutional judges.



(13)        Water, Air, and other things in the environment, including animals or plants which have not been tamed, captured or reduced to domestication by humans, shall be called “the commons”, “the common wealth” and shall be understood as things belonging either to everyone or no one, and state and federal governments shall have the power to protect the commons according to the traditions of Anglo-Saxon or Roman law, according to the selection made in each state or the Federal government.

(14)        The damming of rivers (other than partial diversions of waterways for agricultural irrigation of arid lands), and the monopolization of acquifers or subterranean waters not exactly congruent with surface ownership of the land, shall be forbidden as a violation of the rights of all people; all now extant governmentally operated dams should be dismantled.

(15)        The ocean and large navigable lakes may sometimes be dammed to create more land, but such dams must be authorized by constitutionally enacted laws by the Federal or State legislatures.  Private persons may then acquire such reclaimed property from the government.  Otherwise, the ocean floor and bed of navigable lakes shall not be privately owned, but pollution or destruction of either shall be an offense against all people.

(16)        The private ownership of the surface waters of navigable rivers and lakes connected to navigable rivers and the ocean is abolished and shall be forever be forbidden.

(17)        Any claim to the private ownership of air is null and void.

(18)        Any and all pollution of the air or water shall be actionable by all injured parties in court without limitation to time of injury or amount of damages.

(19)        The government may engage, as may private persons, in industrially polluting activities such the operating and/or launching of motor vehicles, aircraft, and rockets, but individual liability for injury shall attach to any individually responsible governmental officers or employees, except that any otherwise responsible governmental officer or employee who can show that he was acting reasonably pursuant to a lawful legislative or judicial mandate shall be fully indemnified for his liability by the government for any assessment of liability by a constitutional jury or judge.

(20)        Governments shall not tax or otherwise attempt to redistribute income or property equally among the people, except with regard to the aforementioned restrictions on private ownership of air or water.

A slightly shorter summary came after thinking a little bit more about the “slings and arrows” I had mentioned before:

The degree to which I’ve been abused, attacked, and generally “jabbed” on a half-dozen various lefty-comsymp websites during the past year has hardened my resolve—this Country, and California in particular, is run by socialists.  Some of the laws they have passed, and policies they have instituted are truly reprehensible.   I have no idea how old California Civil Code Section 2924 is, but the entire California non-judicial foreclosure system authorizes theft of property under color of law, glorifying senseless destruction of homes and families and increasing economic instability as a matter of official state economic and judicial policy.   The worst anything can say about me is that I’m crazy and demented—even on the lunatic fringe perhaps—but nobody can call me an idiotic socialist… not without my fighting back anyhow…..

In MY version of America—there would be a restoration of all laws guaranteeing the security and stability of the home and of the family structure, of freedom to work and be productive and to compete, free of monopolistic licenses administered by the nation-state and state-corporate government for the benefit of their cronies only.   In general, state control over the economy and private life will be rolled back to a bare minimum, but this will be counterbalanced in favor of the individual by much stronger juries and more honest and independent judges.  Lawyers and litigants will never again be dependent for their livelihood on currying favor with or making campaign contributions to judges.  If there is to be a bar, it will be a voluntary private organization, like a Church or a labor union, and will impose private sanctions based upon the will of its members, not on the whim of modern day kings who wear black rather than red and ermine robes.   No one will ever again be compelled to be a member of any organization in order to have a job or hire people to work in one.  Everyone will be free to compete in every profession.  Each individual will shoulder more risk, but also more responsibility to learn and evaluate, because the state will no longer provide “welfare benefits” of authorizing its agents and supporters as the only competent individuals.  To the degree possible, the family will be free to be the core unit of the economy again, and no family will be forcibly broken up in the name of incredibly vague standards like “best interests of the child” administered by “Departments of Children and Families” (that’s the Florida name—I happen to be writing this from Florida)—as if Children and Families were the wards of the State, and existed ONLY by grace of the sovereign will….

If it is crazy, demented, and luny to think that the Family Courts, Banking system and the attorneys who support them in California and elsewhere in this Country are hopelessly corrupt and opposed to every core American value from initiative to pride in ownership, from “credit” based on productivity rather than normative conformity, then I am proud to be called a crazy, demented, lunatic in California.

The resistance which Steven D. Silverstein has mounted to my litigation against foreclosures and evictions in Orange County has convinced me that the laws of the State of California are the worst in the nation with regard to property ownership and financial foreclosures.

As in NO other state in the Union (except those like Arizona, Hawaii, Idaho, Nevada, and Oregon which slavishly copy California Law), California law protects LIAR and CHEATS.

This has to stop: the immunity of liars whose lies are perfected by attorneys like Silverstein MUST be stopped.  The transformation of California from a state owned by the people to a state owned by international Banking Interests has to stop.

The degree to which economic activity in California is regulated in favor of big business is appalling and astonishing….every activity imaginable staggers the mind.  There are laws for everything in this state.

The reason I would like to run for Governor in this state is to use the Governorship, or much more likely, merely the candidacy for the Governorship, to serve as the “last refuge of free speech” to preach against the monopolistic power of government and the banking conglomerates acting in collusion.

There is nothing worse than the collusion of the banking and financial industries with the attorneys of the state of California and, not coincidentally, the judges of the California Superior Courts and the State Bar of California.

I look forward to hearing from you all…even if it’s only to tell me again how crazy I am for considering this.  I feel, in fact, that it is absolutely essential to have a literal and figurative platform from which to attack the banks and their “servicers” and the attorneys who support their activities, a platform from which I cannot be removed by judges and court bailiffs who deem me “out of order” or “in contempt of court” for failure to obey incompetent and improper, and wholly unconstitutional, judicial orders.

As Noted, I’ll be working on my campaign platform and candidate statement this week, but the basic elements, the key points that I would like to advance, will be as follows:

(1)      FIFTH AMENDMENT PRIVATE PROPERTY: Restore the sanctity of private property by limiting governmental (including both state, county, and local police and judicial) power to seize private property for private gain, as is the fundamental reality of mortgage foreclosure and eviction law in this state today.

(2)      COMMON LAW OBLIGATIONS OF CONTRACT TO BE SECURED AND GUARANTEED AGAINST STATE INTERFERENCE or PRIVATE ABROGATION AND DISREGARD:  All obligations obtained by contract shall be governed by privity of contract and the common law. All statutory provisions (such as California Civil Code 2924) which abrogate or interfere with the HONEST application of common law (which exalting the status of liars and thieves of every kind) should be deemed unconstitutional interference with the obligations of contract and should be stricken from the books either by judicial declaration or legislative fiat, or else the Governor should refuse to enforce or allow any state executive power, including county sheriffs, to enforce the provisions of this law.

(3)      STATE LICENSES & MONOPOLIES, INCLUDING THE MONOPOLY ON STATE VIOLENCE AND FORCE, AND ALL OFFICIAL IMMUNITIES, SHALL BE OPENED UP TO POPULAR REVIEW:  All state issued licenses, patents, and monopolies shall be reviewed for potential abolition by repeal or through judicial declaratory, or else the Governor should refuse to enforce or allow any state agency or executive power to enforce licensing provisions more than 180 days after the next governor takes office until a complete review has been committed and, in the interim, all state funding for the State Bar of California shall be impounded.  All statutes immunizing attorneys and judges from suit for any reason except the mere advocacy of legal positions or rendition of such legal decisions and opinions as are actually required to decide the core elements of cases and controversies over which a court has jurisdiction shall be removed and abolished by judicial declaration, legislative fiat, or executive refusal to uphold any such immunity.

(4)      FREEDOM OF CONTRACT AND PRIVATE PROPERTY ARE THE SUPREME VALUES OF THE STATE AND PEOPLE (ALL NON-ENVIRONMENTAL RESTRICTIONS ON COMMERCE and SUBSIDIES TO BUSINESS TO BE ABOLISHED):  All state restrictions on business and commerce, except those necessary to prevent the contamination of the environment by hazardous chemicals or industrial pollutants, shall immediately be suspended and subjected to review, but all defenses and limitations on liability for damages for personal injury shall be lifted in the courts of California, so that the ability of the people to defend themselves, rather than to seek governmental protection, shall be maximized.  The state as a corporate welfare organization shall cease to exist.  This Governor will approve no new contracts with any privately owned or corporate contractor who has done business with the state during the past eight years.

(5)      (ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES TO RETAIN SPECIAL STATUS): The environmental interests of the people of state of California shall be reevaluated according to the Ancient Anglo-Saxon theory of “the commons” and the Ancient Roman theories of res nullius and terra nullius. That which no person has captured may be protected by the state, but all things which have been reduced to private property shall be deemed as protectable ONLY as private property, and no expropriation of property shall be made by executive order implementing any state or federal law.

(6)      The official languages of California will be English and Spanish bilingually equal, on the Canadian model; programs shall be implemented for testing prospective voters on law and constitutional competence which will require a familiarity and knowledge of the law superior to any test now required for naturalization of foreign citizens.  No person shall be allowed to vote who cannot pass a written multiple choice test at least 180 questions long on the constitution and laws of the United States and California with a score of at least 120 or better out of 180.

(7)      All inmates in the prisons and mental health hospitals in California will be released except those convicted of murder, forcible rape, or assault; all persons incarcerated for financial crimes or drug crimes will be released pending evaluation of their ability to pay indemnity to their victims within a system of state supervised parole; the goal of eliminating post-trial incarceration will be explored in favor of options including corporal punishment (whipping or branding) and financial restitution for all injuries “every crime will sound in tort”).

(8)      The governor will refuse all attempts to enforce the United States Patriot Act or “Real ID” Act in the State of California.

(9)      The governor will propose to the legislature various provisions nullifying the unconstitutional laws enacted and adopted during the past thirty years by the federal government of the United States.  There will be a presumption of validity afforded to any law over 30 years old, except for all laws relating to the banking and financial industries, “the war on drugs”, and the collection of internal revenues.

I have set up a new e-mail: lincoln_for_california@rocketmail.com, and I invite anyone who cares to do so to write me there about whether they think I should run or not.  I am tending, right now, to think that I should run as an “independent” for Senator in the November Race.  California law (quite unfairly I think) seems to forbid anyone who loses in the Partisan primary elections from running as an Independent in the General Elections—but it’s not possible to challenge every single unfair or unreasonable law on every subject all of the time—I should know because I sometimes seem to try to do just that… Humans have just passed too many such laws…. for too long….and most people like their lack of reason…. So would I have a chance of getting my message across?  I already KNOW that I have at best a dismal chance of actually winning any statewide election, but I’m probably going to try….and I just need some “popular reaction and guidance”.  My son Charlie is wildly in favor of my running, but he’s only 17 and a half this month—he’ll be old enough to vote in November….. Most of my friends have said “yes I should”, most of my consultation clients ask if I’ll still have time to work with them if I run (yes I will….), and so far only one friend has said absolutely not, although a few haven’t answered/addressed the point at all.   Lucas D. Smith may have jumped the gun by saying it was a sure thing, but I’m definitely considering whether I was meant to be Prince Hamlet or not…Oh Cursed Spite….I think I might just have been born to set it right….or die trying…..