Tag Archives: Welfare

THE DANGERS OF A CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, by JERRY O’NEIL, STATE REPRESENTATIVE & FORMER STATE SENATOR, MONTANA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, DISTRICT 3, COLUMBIA FALLS & KALISPELL, MONTANA

AGAINST AN AMENDMENTS CONVENTION Montana State Representative Jerry O’Neil of Columbia Falls, Wednesday, 26 February 2014—4:05 PM (1 hour ago) Central Standard Time

I am against an “Amendments Convention” as called for by Mark Levin, Rob Natelson and Tim Baldwin. I do not take this position lightly.

Under the United States Constitution, as interpreted by the U.S. Supreme Court, our President and Congress have taken over our banking, unions, businesses, communications, and education. They have created a secret police/national police (TSA, ICE, Border Patrol, etc), and instituted ObamaCare by which government will control all our health care. They have failed to turn over about 25% of the land area of Montana as was agreed to when we became a state. 

I agree freedom could be advanced with the proper amendments to the U.S. Constitution. As a state legislator, I have attempted several times to amend the U.S. Constitution in order to place some control over, and limits on, the federal government. 

In 2003 I got a bill to repeal the Seventeenth Amendment out of the Senate Judiciary Committee – but it was defeated on the Senate Floor. In the 2005 legislative session I attempted to accomplish close to the same thing by having the Montana legislative caucuses nominate our U.S. Senate candidates to be on the general election ballot. 

In the 2013 legislative session, with Senator Verdell Jackson’s brilliantly executed motion for reconsideration in the Senate, I got House Joint Resolution 3 passed. This is a request for a constitutional amendment to put some sideboards on the “Commerce Clause” of the U.S. Constitution. I presently need some help to get other states to advance this concept. 

Then why am I against an Amendments Convention? Because I don’t believe the majority of the citizens of the United States currently understand or appreciate Freedom. It is not adequately taught in our schools or churches. Even the Pope of the Roman Catholic Church seems to be ignorant of the fact that capitalism has lifted far more out of poverty than socialism and communism ever have. 

Vaclav Klaus, the former Premier of the Czech Republic stated: 

“The danger to America is not Barack Obama but a citizenry capable of entrusting a man like him with the Presidency. It will be far easier to limit and undo the follies of an Obama presidency than to restore the necessary common sense and good judgment to a depraved electorate willing to have such a man for their president. The problem is much deeper and far more serious than Mr. Obama, who is a mere symptom of what ails America. Blaming the prince of the fools should not blind anyone to the vast confederacy of fools that made him their prince. The Republic can survive a Barack Obama, who is, after all, merely a fool. It is less likely to survive a multitude of fools such as those who made him their president.” 

While many of us in Montana have known what is happening for many years, we have not hollered loud enough to wake up our neighbors. We have not always supported the candidates who understood the basics of freedom when they were running for our school boards, city councils, county commissioners, state legislatures, judges, congress and president. We have not sent enough letters to the editor speaking up for freedom. 

We have been complacent, attending churches where the preachers would not take a stand on Biblical principals of freedom because they were afraid they would loose their parishioners’ monetary support and their federal tax exemption. Many of these churches would not even mention it to their congregations when they knew a political candidate was in favor of government supported abortions. 

For years we have watched the Supreme Court put forth immoral, anti freedom and statist decisions , including the Dred Scott decision, the Slaughter House Cases, Wickard v. Filburn, Garcia v. San Antonio Metropolitan Transit Authority, Gonzales v. Raich, Roe v. Wade, and Lawrence v. Texas. We have allowed the bigs, such as AIG, General Electric, Bank of America and Monsanto, to choose the likes of McCain and Romney to be our presidential candidates. (Will they choose Chris Christie for us this coming election?) 
We have known for years deficit financing as advocated by Keynesian economists constitutes theft from our seniors’ retirement accounts and supports the big banks. Yet the public supported the Federal Reserve Act in order to “furnish an elastic currency.” 
We have supported our universities where the professors of economics are beholden to the Federal Reserve System as consultants, board members, or for having published their masters or doctors thesis in one of the fed’s magazines. 

We have seen the evidence of how the “bigs”, including the pharmaceuticals, banking industry, insurance, unions and other protected industries and professions own the political establishment, but we have not supported the repeal of the Seventeenth Amendment to lessen the bigs’ power and return some semblance of states’ rights. 

We have seen socialism advance but have not challenged the expansion of Social Security, Medicaid, Medicare, federal intervention in education, food stamps, ObamaCare, and a whole plethora of other government programs. 

We have seen the installation of the Real ID act, the Patriot Act, and the National Defense Authorization Act, but, because we were afraid, we kept silent. We accept airport screening and government eavesdropping. We take off our shoes at the airports like good comrades. 

The people of Montana believe government can pass laws to make them more affluent. 
In 2006 we 72.7% of the voters passed Initiative I-151 to increase the minimum wage. By so doing we devalued the dollar and deprived many Indian children on our reservations, where unemployment is over 50%, the opportunity to get their first job. The minimum wage effect on those whom age out of our foster care system is similarly devastating. At the age of 26, 46.8 percent of participants responding to one study were unemployed. We need to make it easier to hire the needy, not remove the bottom rung of their ladder to prosperity. 

In our last Montana election we passed initiative I-166 by a 3 to 1 majority. The fuzzy catch phrase with which it was sold to the public was “Corporations are not People.” That was what appeared on the ballot. The rest of I-166, which did not appear on the ballot, called for a repeal of the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution! The intent was to abolish the freedoms of speech, press and association that Congress is presently not allowed to interfere with. If I-166 is successful, these freedoms likely will be replaced with statutory rules as Congress sees fit. 

While the public remains asleep to the concept of freedom it is too dangerous to make it easier to change the Constitution. 
Our Constitution contains negative rights, stating what government can’t do to us or take away from us. We are too likely to throw away these “negative rights” contained in the Constitution and Bill of Rights and replace them with “positive rights,” such as a right to: free health care, free child care, living wages, and government controlled food prices. 

Maybe the chance to amend positive rights into our Constitution is the reason George Soros, Common Cause, the Move to Amend coalition and hundreds of other progressive organizations are also pushing for an Article V amendments convention. 

What are we going to do to save freedom for our progeny? When are we going to stop bowing to the socialists, fascists and communists? When are we going to demand our schools and churches teach and advocate for freedom? When are we going to join freedom fighters holding up signs along the highways criticizing the big government statists and asking for freedom? When are we going to stand up in church and speak up for political candidates who will fight for the Biblical truths and freedoms that our founding fathers fought and died for? 

Until the majority of the public understands and believes in freedom an Amendments Convention is more likely to enslave us than to free us. Therefore I am against having one at this time.

“A year from now, ten, they’ll swing back to the belief that they can make people better. And I do not hold to that.” Eugenics and Bioengineering as forms of State Sponsored Welfare DO NOT make people better…..a debate with Bob Hurt of Clearwater, Florida….

Von: Bob Hurt <bob@bobhurt.com>
An: Charles Lincoln <charles.lincoln@rocketmail.com>; Lawsters <lawsters@googlegroups.com>
Gesendet: 14:06 Samstag, 19.Mai 2012
Betreff: Re: [Lawmen 4733] Eugenics is NOT A Reason to Revise the 13th Amendment
Charles:Thank you for responding.  That was the first intelligen comment I have received on the topic, so I appreciate it.
Bob, like I said—I respect you a great deal, we’ve done some great things/seminars together and I hope we’ll do more in the future—I consider you a friend, if terribly blind on this point….

First, I don’t believe you understand IQ tests, for you you did, you would know that in the past 100 years they have evolved to become absolutely the best predictor of the ability to evaluate relative importances, solve problems, and achieve academic excellence.  
What I see and understand about IQ tests is that they are a circular argument, a Catch-22, a self-fulfilling prophecy.  Certain specialists designed IQ Tests, persuaded other specialists to rely on them, and since these specialists rely on them, the USE them, and discriminate among people according to such tests.  ALL Standardized tests work EXACTLY the same way: SAT, MCAT, GRE, LSAT, etc.—yes, even the Multistate Bar Exam and the Multistate Ethics exam—CLASSICAL EDUCATION IN THE US HAS BEEN REPLACED BY TEACHING TEST-TAKING SKILLS.  I think it is disgraceful, and that all standardized tests need to be thrown in the garbage—“the rubbish pit of history” to use one K. Marx’ catchy phrase….
You seem loathe to admit that, but for the protection and support of government and society, the stupid would perish or become slaves, as they have down through the millennia, not because of race, but because of cognitive ability.
No, I am NOT “loathe to admit” anything—but I read the record differently: GOVERNMENT and SOCIETY decide who is stupid, and for those who really can’t adapt—natural selection works MUCH more fairly than “Government Protection and Support.”  In fact–what I LOATHE is that very phrase: “Government Protection and Support.”  I don’t know whether you’ve seen the movie “The Hunger Games” yet—but if not you (and everybody else) really should.  
“The Hunger Games” is a story set in and about the aftermath of a revolution in North America of the future in which “the people rose up against the Government that fed them, loved them, protected them….” and were punished severely as a result.  LOOK AT THE WAY Southerners have been degraded and caricatured as stupid ignorant oafs since 1865.  The Post-War Southerners did JUST FINE for many years without government Protection and Support—in fact, they did fine IN THE FACE OF government oppression and intentional discrimination—arguably, they did better than they’ve done WITH such protection and support.  Likewise, all of Latin America and Africa were “undeveloped” by U.S. and European Colonialism which sought to protect these “poor pathetic people” from themselves—i.e. since they couldn’t organize multi-national companies and international banks on their own.  The people of District 12 grew strong through quiet resistance and isolation within Panem (the name of the “North American Union” in the “Hunger Games” were “protected and supported” by a totalitarian regime which existed by squeezing everything they could out of the people and leaving them with nothing).  
Third, you seemed to have missed the point that we of competence have become slaves to the incompetent, through welfare, minimum wages, crime, and associated infrastructure costs which we must pay.  That has happened largely because of flaws in the constitutions, gnawing guilt and political correctness, and suffrage for the stupid, incompetent, and irresponsible.
BOB—YOU seem to miss the point that it is precisely a paternalistic attitude like yours—whereby some people THINK they are stronger or better than others, that breeds this kind of stupidity in Welfare—we have to stop thinking that WE KNOW better or can make OTHER people better—we have to learn to live by the adage “Let it be.”  NO ONE has the right to make decisions for anyone else, except by agreement.  We do not have the right to classify people in LEGAL terms, deprive them of rights, based on our OPINIONS of them.  We have the right to live our own lives and not be bothered with anyone else UNLESS WE WISH TO BE—and this, I think is the biggest single reason I feel I have to argue for you.  You are SO much like Madison Grant and the “Progressives” of Theodore Roosevelt’s Age—like Oliver Wendell Holmes on the Supreme Court writing in favor of sterilization of imbeciles in the 1920s—THESE ARE THE PEOPLE WHO GAVE RISE TO THE CURRENT WELFARE STATE—even though the “gnawing guilt and political correctness” elements are basically a 1960s Herbert Marcuse—Frankfurt School of Social Though addition which the Elite Find EVEN more useful—precisely because it gives them the right to call people who are NOT politically correct or do not feel the guilt “stupid, inferior.”  Southern Whites are stupid hicks but racists everywhere have lower IQs than non-racists, didn’t you know that?  Patriotic Constitutionalists are the stupidest people of all because they just don’t understand the Marxist progression of history which will PROTECT AND SUPPORT all people everywhere…. Can’t you see that?  Christians are stupid compared with Atheists, Conservative Republicans have less education than Liberal Democrats—all of this is part of the competitive instinct of humans, inherited through evolutionary competition, as E.O. Wilson has described so well in “The Social Conquest of Earth”
Fourth, you have erred in your assessment of slavery in ancient times.  The foreign survivors of successful wars always became slaves for life, although laws provided ways to win freedom, typically by demonstrations of deserving freedom.
I have certainly NOT erred in my assessment of slavery in ancient times—I said it was not based on inherited characteristics, so that Angles enslaved in one war did not give rise to any presumption that “Angles” would be slaves forever.
Fifth, you seem not to grok the outcome of a system such as what I propose.  
I do not “grok” it because I would BLOCK it with every bone in my body, every fibre in my muscles, every neuron in my brain.

  • And, we can refer to masters/slaves by different terms to mollify the leftist liberals seeking political correctness in place of substance.  We could call it the Ward system and the participants caregivers/wards.  How’s that?
    You forget that I perfectly see the system of involuntary servitude you propose because I OPPOSE THE VERY NOTION OF WELFARE and that ANY person should ever be WARD to another as a matter of birth, “intelligence” or class.  If our parents develop alzheimers WE should take care of them—they should not become “Wards of the State”—our children are helpless at birth but even LESS should we allow THEM to become WARDS OF THE STATE—but ultimately, your system (based on early 20th Century Eugenic Theories) LEADS INEXORABLY to the wardship of all children and RIGHT BACK TO THE BRAVE NEW WORLD.  This has NOTHING to do with Political Correctness—it has EVERYTHING to do with restoring MEANINGFUL FUNDAMENTAL FREEDOM FOR ALL—and protecting MY Second Amendment Right to Shoot anyone in the head who thinks they are smarter than me if that means they think they can take me for a WARD….by the way…
  • Government or private parties could encourage the stupid to undergo voluntary permanent sterilization, just by offering money.  The ranks of the stupid would diminish dramatically from that clever negotiation, repeated in communities all over the nation.  And from the viewpoint of the economy, it would dramatically reduce the burden on taxpayers.  That bit of eugenics does not hurt anyone. 
  • Again, Bob—this is just beyond repugnant to me—it is Progressivism and New Deal/Great Society Socialism run amok—that is why it is, in essence NAZIISM at its worst….. Taxes like the Income Tax ONLY exist because people are WILLING to have OTHERS make socially important decisions for them—I say, to HELL WITH THAT—Everyone makes their own decisions and lives or dies by them…. that’s freedom….
  • Government should outlaw procreation of the stupid because such procreation is such a tort against the innocent baby that it becomes a crime against the person and society as the child grows into adulthood and resorts to crime and welfare abuse to subsist.  This really is a legal matter and a matter of right.  A baby has a right to grow into a well-functioning adult, and parents have the responsibility to make that possible.
  • If this is really what you want—I will have to fight you if you ever come to power—which I guess means we’ll never have to fight—but “outlaw the procreation of the stupid?”  This is EXACTLY what Oliver Wendell Holmes was advocating, along with Madison Grant and others, in the first 3rd of the 20th century—YOU have no right to say who should procreate and neither do I, and neither did Oliver Wendell Holmes or Madison Grant or either of the Presidents Roosevelt.  I think this is just loathsome—and I wonder about it–because I think of your niece—I can’t remember her name—in your own family there are examples of what can be called less than brilliant breeding, are there not?  You would not begrudge your own flesh and blood the right to procreate as she sees fit, would you?
  • Families of means, including middle class families, could typically afford to house, feed, and clothe the stupid, so long as those stupid did not procreate children the caregivers did not want.  Many if not most homes have extra bedrooms to accommodate live-in Wards who could become loved, respected members of the family, perform services for the family, and submit to the discipline of the head of the household.  Most so-called slaves prior to the 1860’s were really NOT slaves in the sense of wearing chains, getting horsewhipped and served only gruel to eat, and suffering untreated diseases and illnesses. Nor would modern Wards suffer such abuse.  The spirit of love would blossom in most families with one or more live-in Wards.  This alone would keep many Wards out of crime, malnutrition, prison, drug abuse, and general dereliction.
  • You are saying something very different in this paragraph and I have no wish to disagree that “charity is our first obligation” and civilized people and as Christians, and that such charity, if enshrined as a real cultural norm, would go a long way towards solving all these problems. 

Churches could start playing a big role in the administration of the Ward system, which they should have all along.

Again, this is something I have no intention of arguing about—but it is irrelevant to your contentions regarding the 13th Amendment….or “the belief that they can make people better…AND I DO NOT HOLD TO THAT.”  

As for eugenics, it is nothing more than family planning on a larger scale, and it is perfectly ethical.  In fact NOT to engage in eugenics plans and programs is the height of hyocrisy and disrespect toward the members of future civilizations.  If you want me to explain it to you in detail, let me know.  Meanwhile, ponder the adage “It takes seven generations to create a gentleman.”  It does not happen by accident.
You seem determined to prove Captain Malcolm Reynolds of the Good Ship Serenity correct when he said:

So now I'm asking more of you than I have before. Maybe all. 'Cause as sure as I know anything I know this: They will try again. Maybe on another world, maybe on this very ground, swept clean. A year from now, ten, they'll swing back to the belief that they can make people... better. And I do not hold to that.

Bob

 

On 05/18/2012 10:49 PM, Charles Lincoln wrote:

My Dear Bob Hurt:
Your recidivism in your support of Eugenics is just appalling.   You know I feel that way.  Why do you keep coming back to this topic?
Eugenics is the most outrageous of all infringements on the fundamental rights of humanity, whether we believe that those rights originate from the State of Nature or God’s Endowment.  The Ancient Latin Legal classification of slavery was a contractual arrangement both socially approved and lawful but contra natura.
It is particularly appalling that you frame it (with a great deal of intellectual honesty and analytical integrity—for which at least you deserve due credit) in terms of a repeal of the 13th Amendment, and that you start off with a comparison to seat belts.  You may recall—my war against Seatbelt laws and the police abuse such laws invite is at the root of everything that made me into a FORMERLY licensed lawyer, as well as a FORMER Republican (President of Tulane College Republicans 1976-78).  
I believe in freedom and liberty and I wouldn’t trust ANY HUMAN BEING to determine my fitness or yours to live and breathe.  I think I am basically as conservative as anyone could possibly be, but I do not consider Naziism genuinely conservative, even though I can admire and sympathize with some of the traditionalist, historical identity and heritage aspects of the Fascist movements in 20th Century Europe and Latin America.  
To me, the ideology of the Founders in 1770-1792 (Boston Massacre of 1770 through Washington’s First Term as President under the Constitution of 1787 and the adoption of the Bill of Rights) and of John Randolph of Roanoke, Andrew Jackson, Roger Taney, John Caldwell Calhoun, John C. Breckenridge, Jefferson Davis, Judah P. Benjamin, and the all Founders of the Confederate States of America represent real, genuine, honest and truly American “Classical Liberal” conservatism.  AND NONE of them would ever have tolerated Eugenics—because it is an interference with the fundamental rights of individuals and families.
And that brings up an interesting point—you are advocating REPEAL or REVISION of the 13th Amendment in order to implement Eugenics?
Now, I just said I deeply admire and support the memory of the founders of the Confederate States of America, and the Southern Partisans who preceded them, but Slavery and Freedom are, by definition, incompatible lifestyles.  The 13th Amendment was adopted without the popular support of the 40% of the Nation who had no real vote in 1865, and yet today it is one of the least controversial provisions of the Constitution, and I think it needs to stay that way, and be enforced for every person.
I agree that the citizenship questions created by emancipation and left unresolved as of today are a threat to a homogeneous society in which freedom can flourish, but I totally disagree that slavery on any pretext, including the criminal laws of the United States, or Eugenics through anything as totally malleable and manipulable as IQ scores, could or should be allowed to exist.  In my opinion, segregation of the races might be a better path to restoration of true freedom and dignity for all, as well as a more natural path to foster divergent evolutionary paths which could, in the long run, compete my old Harvard neighbor and Museum of Comparative Zoology Professor E.O. Wilson has recently described the sociobiological origins of racial separation and competition (http://www.vdare.com/articles/e-o-wilson-nationalist, review of “The Social Conquest of the Earth.”)
Black Slavery was, in so many ways, America’s “original sin”—every student of the Bible knows that “original sin” is that in which we all share, as human beings, from which none of us can ever completely escape except through Salvation.  Original Sin is “sin” because it embodies and reflects everything that we need, everything that we want, naturally, and yet it is wrong.  People WANT to live free of care, fear, labor and all kinds of responsibility, which they would like to dump on someone else’s broader shoulders.  The Africans were naturally strong and by selective breeding in slavery they were made stronger.  Was this a good or desirable result for the White People?  For the White Race as a whole?  As an evolutionary experiment?  No, it was not. It was in fact a disaster—a continuing disaster.
But Bob—what you are suggesting is that we use IQ tests, one of the results of the “Original Sin” of Slavery having been to artificially import and then depress the intelligence of the Africans and other groups by educational intent, and then solidify that back into history by restoring IQ as a substitute for skin color in the restoration of slavery.
This is, I think, wrong in every possible way.  I do not believe that miscegenation is the road to happiness or a cure for the original sin of slavery, because I think that race-mixing destroys the natural diversity of the species—which I think is a GOOD and POSITIVE thing—even if it results in some people SEEMING dumber, less intelligent, or attractive to us than others.  We need to MAINTAIN the diversity of the world AND the freedom of each individual by securing individual and family autonomy, not slavery.
In the Ancient World (Rome & Greece), Slavery was almost always a temporary thing, by contract (arising from debt), and there were no permanent slave classes.  Slaves were often extraordinarily talented artists, cooks, musicians, actors/dancers, or even poets, and Slaves often tutored their masters’ children.  Even when Rome brought in captive armies or whole communities as slaves, these communities did not stay enslaved forever, from generation to generation. (I think of the comment about the Angles [Ancestors of the English] whose appearance was so beautiful on the Streets of Rome that Pope Gregory the I said, “non Angli see Angeli” and promptly dispatched as missionary the future Saint Augustine of Canterbury to preach to the Kentish Angles as well as the South and Eastern Saxons of Sussex and Essex—the point being that there was no pretense that the Angles would be a hereditary class of slaves forever).
But worst of all, I think your criteria for selecting a “slave” vs. a “free” class are more subject, and hence more unfair than even the Nazis could devise.  It is normally fairly clear, after all, who is Black or White, who is Jewish or Christian by birth or heritage.  
But in what I can only call an adoration of pseudo-science, you equate IQ and wealth with class and entitlement.  This, too, is appalling.  All IQ tests have been shown to be matters of learned behavior—“nurture not nature”, and so education would be the solution for that, except that compulsory education is itself a form of governmental interference with the absolute freedom into which all living beings and creatures are born.
I believe that people have to be free to make choices, good and bad, just like genetic mutations, some of which are beneficial, some of which are not, but most of which are simply neutral.
NO GROUP OF HUMANS has the God-like capacity or the God-like right to try to guide evolution or the “re-creation” of the human species.
I don’t know whether you ever saw the movie Serenity directed and produced by Joss Whedon (whose latest creation is the new Avengers), but Captain Malcolm Reynolds of the “Good ShipSerenity” (a “Firefly” Class Spaceship) engages in the following key monologue, after the discovery of what had really happened to the people of Miranda—who were poisoned by Government experiments in “behavioral improvement” based on similar pseudo-science:
This report is maybe twelve years
          old. Parliament buried it, and it
          stayed buried til River dug it up.
          This is what they feared she knew.
          And they were right to fear,
          'cause there's a universe of folk
          that are gonna know it too.
          (touches the cylinder)
          They're gonna see it. Somebody
          has to speak for these people.
          (everybody waits)
 (CONTINUING)           You all got on this boat for
          different reasons, but you all
          V0 come to the same place. So now
          I'm asking more of you than I have
          before. Maybe all. 'Cause as
          sure as I know anything I know
          this: They will try again. Maybe
          on another world, maybe on this
          very ground, swept clean. A year from now, ten, they'll swing back to the belief that they can make people... better. And I do not hold to that.

Charles Edward Lincoln, III

“Ich bin der Geist der stets verneint! Und das mit Recht.”

Deo Vindice/Tierra Limpia

Telephone: 512-968-2500
In case of emergency call Peyton Yates Freiman (Texas)
at 512-968-2666 or e-mail freimanthird@gmail.com


Matthew 10:34-39
Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. . . . And he that taketh not his cross, and followeth after me, is not worthy of me. . . .  

Von: Bob Hurt <bob@bobhurt.com>
An: Lawsters <lawsters@googlegroups.com>; Lawmen <lawmen@googlegroups.com>
Gesendet: 13:21 Freitag, 18.Mai 2012
Betreff: [Lawmen: 4733] A Reason to Revise the 13th Amendment

I welcome discussion of the questions and issues raised below, but please keep hateful or insulting rejoinders to yourself.
A Reason to Revise the 13th Amendment
Copyright © by Bob Hurt 18 May 2012. All rights reserved

Pesky Questions About Bozos

Does a society have the right to enact laws that effectively prevent members of the society from
  • becoming a financial burden on the rest of society?
  • endangering others in society?
  • infecting innocent babies with a condition of lifelong obtuseness, brutishness, torpidity, and lack of intelligence?
How and why has the USA changed in average intelligence since its beginning?
Does any right of a society or civilization justify limiting the lower boundary of intelligence for parenting, such as through eugenics programs?
This commentary addresses those questions and might provide insights for the sincere truth-seeker.

Law and Likelihood of Harming Others

Consider the legislative enactments regulating business practices, highway traffic, and human relations. Take for example seatbelt laws. Government requires people to buckle themselves in because:
  • People often cause car crashes through negligence, incompetence, judgment error, or equipment failure;
  • The violence of car crashes often maim or kill people in and out of the car;
  • Such terrible loss causes families to suffer from reduced of earning power and enjoyment of life, and becoming a burden on society;
Thus, modern civilizations prohibit human actions likely to endanger selves. others, and society.

Qualities and Uses of Intelligence in Civilization

According to Wikipedia’s IQ article, IQ has high heritability, intgelligence highly correlates to SAT scores, and people with IQ of 70 to 90 will likely engage in criminal behavior. Lynn and Vanhanen’s books on IQ show the high correlation of national average IQ to gross national product. Therefore, means exist for society to determine the intelligence (g factor) and IQ of its members, and their corresponding value to society in terms of productivity, academic achievement, likely crimnality, burden on society, and the likelihood of low-intelligence parents procreating low-intelligence children.
One must have an IQ of at least 85 to graduate from high school. US IQ distributions from actual tests reveal that at least 75 million of its people have IQ below 85 and even more cannot graduate from high school because of behavior and health problems associated with low intelligence.
In the past 150 years the US has moved away from circumstances requiring massive numbers of low-intelligence people in its military and work forces. The military leaders of today desperately want recruits to have high school diplomas, and many manual labor jobs have moved to 3rd world countries as mechanization has modernized farms and factories. America needs people who can think, arrive at correct evaluations, and make correct decisions.

Hypocrisy of Ignoring the Gene Pool

Wouldn’t it make sense to reduce the need for protective laws, prisons, and welfare infrastructures legislating to elevate the quality of the gene pool?
I see the refusal to take such action as rank hypocrisy:
  • We demand laws regulating seatbelt usage, road, motor vehicle, and building construction, highway speed, driver licenses, professions like plumbing, dentistry, medicine, and lawyering, and many other areas of life, on the basis of likelihood of resultant injury. But,
  • We ignore the far higher likelihood of injury resulting from procreation by people of low intelligence.
How much sense does that make?
Hypocrisy aside, does it not seem unintelligent to refuse to discuss the reasons and means for reducing the percentage of grossly unintelligent people in future populations? Does it not seem even more stupid to refuse out of political correctness – the notion of feeling embarrassed that the topic might offend those of grossly low intelligence?
How about taking a poll of the stupid and ask them whether they enjoy feeling confused, frustrated, victimized, in trouble, and unable to learn, to figure things out, or to make prudent decisions? We might discover that they think they figure things out just fine, or that they hate the condition and would become smart if they could.
Well, aside from that, it could go without saying that the highly intelligent would find some tasks boring that the lowly intelligent would find gratifying. Likewise, tasks that would challenge and gratify the intelligent would frustrate and anger the unintelligent.
Many jobs exist that would suit the unintelligent. Thus, society’s needs for the unintelligent still exist, such as domestic servitude, and simple tasks for which employers cannot afford machines. But such tasks have an economic value nonetheless, and it makes no economic sense to force an employer to pay more than the value of them.

Intelligence Strata (Classes) in America

The existence of 75 million relatively unintelligent people in America and the lack of available jobs for such people poses a serious problem that has resulted in America’s prisons bursting at the seams.
America has entered an age where it handles unintelligent people as follows:
  • Puts them into the welfare system (they burden taxpayers); and
  • Suffers crimes at their hands (they burden their victims and then the criminal justice system).
Meanwhile, the very smart have advertised the American Dream’s cornucopia of goods and services which the unwealthy obtain through debt. The unwealthy, unlike the unintelligent, do have intelligence, but either don’t use it sufficiently to become wealthy, or actually don’t have quite enough intelligence to become wealthy. That is, wealth does not generally happen by accident except when inherited by someone who very likely has high intelligence, the offspring of someone intelligent enough to garner wealth.
So we have three major strata:
  • The highly intelligent wealthy (high class)
  • The somewhat intelligent or lazy unwealthy (middle class)
  • The unintelligent poor (low class)
In practice:
  • The high class has managed to make the middle class into voluntary servants through glitzy ads and debt.
  • Many of the high and middle class employ the low class for domestic servants.
  • Some, but not that many, of the middle and high classes provide the low class with food, clothing, and shelter as part of the domestic servitude arrangement.
  • The existence of many if not most of the low class have made the high and middle classes into their involuntary servants through crime, and taxation that pays for welfare abuse, health care, social workers, failed education efforts, and prisons.
  • Even though taxes on the high class do pay for the upkeep of the low class, the high class never notices it as a burden because of other tax benefits and shelters, but those taxes impose a severe burden on the middle class.

The 13th Amendment and Reverse Slavery

This makes it apparent that the 13th Amendment did not actually abolish involuntary servitude. In reality, it appears that Americans, through their misguided sense of fairness, justice, and altruism, have destroyed the effectiveness of community charity programs for the feckless, handing those to government, and converted the middle class into slaves of the low class AND the high class.
The upshot of this weird dilemma: Americans have upset the Law of the Survival of the Fittest with a system of legislated slavery of the middle class to the high class through usurious debt and to the low class through taxation. Victims of this system can only imagine that the high class engineered it intentionally. It does seem pretty slick when one ponders it. And that explanation clarifies the reason Government refuses to patrol the borders or impose some kind of check on the presently unrestrained procreation of children by unintelligent parents.
This dilemma and its causes constitute a wholly immoral, unethical perversion of civilization’s ideals. A society ought to engineer civilization for evolution toward some age of light and life, so to speak, where no crime, poverty, or war exists, and people can prosecute their ambitions without unduly burdening their fellows. That can never happen in an increasingly mechanized society in which 25% of the people haven’t the cognitive ability to graduate from high school, and will certainly resort largely to crime or welfare abuse to get by.
People of low intelligence make sense in a free society so long as others don’t become systematic slaves to them. The unintelligent must have a means of becoming gainfully, self-sufficiently, and happily employed, or the wards of those willing to care for and obtain economic benefits from them. The unintelligent simply cannot become and remain wards of the state without an economic justification. Liberty, after all, comes at the expense of commensurate responsibility.

Reverse Slavery Justifies 13th Amendment Revision

The foregoing discussion sheds new light on the 13th Amendment. That Amendment should stand, but ONLY for people with sufficient IQ and ambition to operate self-sufficiently. So, Congress ought to modify it a bit to that end.
Though many might feel loathe to admit it, involuntary servitude gave many benefits to many people, in spite of members of master and slave classes abusing one another.

Potential Benefits of 13th Amendment Revision

It provided sustenance, employment, and regulation for the servants and labor and other economic and personal benefits for the masters. Both sides benefited and to a large extent enjoyed the arrangement. And most of the servants, though slaves, escaped far worse conditions in their homelands.
But, involuntary servitude had serious deficiencies:
  • Incorrigible and violent slaves endangered the master and other slaves, and belonged in prison, not in a family or commercial enterprise.
  • Abusive or negligent masters hurt or deprived their slaves.
  • Many people became slaves who had the intelligence and raw ability become good, self-sufficient citizens, and should not have become involuntary servants.
Today we have a reverse-slavery system where the high and middle classes, who can care for themselves and become good citizens, have become involuntary servants to the low class who cannot care for themselves or become good citizens.
Society must reverse this situation while dramatically reducing the low class to a size that society actually needs for a smoothly functioning economy. That constitutes the supreme reason to outlaw production of bozos in America. Within 3 generations the averate intelligence of the nation will rise significantly, welfare will diminish so that neighborhoods can handle it without government interference, crime will drop dramatically, inner city ghettos will disappear, prison industries will shrink, and America will become monumentally more productive, more competitive than ever in the world economy.
And, Americans with good sense should demand a change to the 13th Amendment to impose a system of involuntary servitude on able-bodied people who, by their nature, cannot or will not care for themselves without hurting or burdening others.
Americans of good sense will otherwise remain slaves to the unintelligent of the land. And that just doesn’t make much sense, does it?
# # #
Bob Hurt
2460 Persian Drive #70, Clearwater, FL 33763-1925
(727) 669-5511   http://bobhurt.com


You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups “Lawmen” group.
To post to this group, send email to lawmen@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lawmen+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lawmen?hl=en.

Bob Hurt

2460 Persian Drive #70, Clearwater, FL 33763-1925
(727) 669-5511   http://bobhurt.com

Who knows corruption and oppression in America best? The victims all know….. And yes, I am one….

Why should you vote for a convicted felon?  Because you could be the next victim of injustice—and if you’re not, some relative or neighbor of yours probably is the next.  The government has set out to reduce us all to shame and compliance through a horrendous code which has already imprisoned/restricted the liberty of 3% of the population—that means that just under 1 in every 30 people, nationwide.

Some people may wonder why I am considering a run for U.S. Senate when I am a disbarred lawyer and “convicted felon.”  I find it hilarious that my detractors like to call me a “convicted felon.” It’s just so inglorious to call me a “convicted one-time misstater of his social security for no readily ascertainable reason. I am a convicted “Enemy of the State,” and damned proud of it, because “Everybody know that the system’s rotten.”

My opponents will probably get a kick out of circulating my Federal Prison system ID and mug shots I’m sure, once the campaign really starts (my Federal Prison ID number was already published somewhere on line—and not be me, either…and those who enjoy discussing my “crime” of a misstated social security number have repeatedly published my social security number INcorrectly—which you’ve got to admit is kind of funny).

But as I’ve said and written many times, I wear them all as “Red Badges of Courage.” These pictures are wounds which show nothing more than that I have deeply disturbed the powers that be so much that they feel they MUST make me into a criminal, because to allow me to stand, free and respectable, would make them all look so much less so.  To the population at large I’ll tell you: you NEED to contribute to and vote for this convicted Felon and Disbarred Lawyer because he is one of the few with the knowledge and perspective to really dismantle the corrupt system and start to make YOU free or at least free-ER and less shackled and manacled. You are all shackled and manacled in this land of false-freedom, lame-liberty, and conscience-free semi-consciousness in front of the TV.

We need to restore freedom.

We need to simplify society and restore the right of individuals to structure their own relationships with each other, and the reduce the power of government by, among other things, dismantling the unnatural infrastructures which only government can maintain, and which all depend on communistic theft and wealth redistribution, which ultimately makes us all so much poorer.   So yes, what this country needs is more convicted felons (convicted, in essence, of breathing air—or dust at the worst), all frankly, ALL lawyers, the very practice of law itself, MUST BE DISBARRED and all the practitioners set truly free, as I have been for the last nine-eleven years, to form my own opinions and come to my own conclusions, free from the oppression of Bar Committees and Judges.

So, if you’ve never been arrested, never seen any Federal or State jail, penitentiary, or “correctional facility” from the inside, you may consider yourself lucky, or worse, you may consider yourself a “really good, law-abiding citizen.”

But I would beg to differ with you.

In fact, I think you are deprived and lack information necessary to see the world as it really is: you know only what a cave looks like in electric lights, and not what one looks like in torchlight, starlight coming through an open cliffside entrance, or, indeed, no light at all.  And not to know a cave in total darkness is simply not to know the reality of a cave.

For my part, I think it is the not merely the birthright but the duty of every American to see and understand how the least fortunate in society are treated.   Only there in prison, not just watching the men and women chained together in rows but being one of them, can one really see into the heart of darkness of this bright land of the free.  I submit that no one should criticize Nazi Germany, the Soviet Gulag, or the massive slaughters of Maoist and Pol-Pot’s versions of Oriental Despotism until s/he is aware of what it feels like to live even for a short while incarcerated, surrounded by those men and women of sorrows who are hated, rejected, despised and intimately acquainted with grief.  To live all one’s life in a comfortable middle-class cocoon is hardly to live at all.  It is good and worthwhile to see up close and understand the depraved sadism of White American young and middle-aged male and female prison guards, how much pleasure they take in herding and taunting formerly free men and women like cattle, feeding them like pigs, sheering them like sheep of all outward trappings of dignity.

Ask yourself what normal person would want the job of a “Correctional Services Officer,” but also ask yourself what person could remain normal and decent while serving as a “Correctional Services Officer.”  As is so frequently advertised on late night Television—the “Correctional Services Industry” is one of the fastest growing fields and opportunities for employment in America—“Help Keep the Prison Planet Safe”—I am inclined to wonder whether the Russian Press is right that Dominique Strauss-Kahn was arrested, framed for rape, because of the revelations he planned to make about the American Financial System.  

Once you have reflected on these points, you will understand how Auschwitz and Treblinka were built, staffed, and maintained by the German people, born in one of the two or three most civilized nations in the world, who had grown up listening to Bach, Beethoven, and Mozart, reading Goethe & Schiller, and Nietzche and Schopenhauer.

How much easier will it be for today’s generation raised on grunge or punk (at the best) or rap (the currently universal lowest common denominator) to imprison their fellow man?   The cultural degradation of America means to me that we will soon care nothing at all for our fellow human beings, and will treat them worse than the Nazis, more in tune with the Soviet gulags and Chinese/Cambodian mass slaughters.

In state penal systems, the worst treated are the sex-offenders, alleged and real, who are the real bearers of the ultimate stigmata our courts have the power to inflict, worse than murderers, worse than bombers, sex-offenders, in or out of prison, are a category or prisoners unto themselves. They are feared and shunned even by other inmates.

In the federal “correctional” system, the worst treated are the illegal immigrants. These are honest, hardworking people from foreign lands, lured by greedy employers on this side of the border who CONSTANTLY open their doors and wallets to the illegals, and the illegal immigrants are all shuttled around on busses and on “Con-Air” and, like the sex offenders, bullied by otherwise unemployable, middle-aged guards while shackled and manacled, stigmatized for life by their offenses.

How much I loathe the state and federal penal systems in America, and the lawyers, judges, and “justice” systems, filling them with populations larger than the original population of the 13 colonies, I can never say.  And yet I am so grateful to God Almighty and indeed to U.S. District Judges Lynn N. Hughes and Janis Graham Jack as well. I am so happy that I have spent two months behind bars, so that I can speak for America’s victims of injustice from personal experience, and understand the dehumanization and filth of even the most “sanitary” federal facilities.  Otherwise I never would have known about the clinical cold of the stale air conditioned air meant to depress minds and souls and simulate death, the mind washing drill of telling people that they have no rights, only privileges, while supposedly creating a more “healthful” environment (socially and biologically).

V-for-Vendetta as a movie is emblematic of my life: like the prisoner from Cell V, and also like Madame Terese Defarge in Tale of Two Cities, I count the days and treasure the memories of those who have oppressed me until the revolution will tear down all our hundreds and thousands of crowded, modern-day “Bastilles” and “relocation camps.”

The Obama Administration was elected in part to fulfill the American Dream of true racial equality, but the reality is that the jails remain disproportionately filled with people of color, and Obama has done nothing to restore the freedom of “his” people.  I am not Black or Hispanic, but I would fight for genuine penal reform, repeal of most of the Federal Criminal Code in fact, and define “the general welfare” as something better than a choice between government handouts to the unemployed, membership in the Army to destroy freedom abroad in the name of safety here at home, and incarceration for so many good business entrepreneurs who had the drive or incentive to make their own way in the world.

I am inspired to write today by reviewing the sanctimonious texts written about me on one particularly “Foggy” newsgroup dedicated to supporting and exonerating the Obama regime.   The contributors to this group are silly, all too comfortable, middle-class professionals and a few Foggy-bottom-feeding scum-suckers they collect around them.  Among the latter there is a former ungrateful homeless tenant and single mother for whom I did way too much and from whom I got absolutely nothing in return except grief.

The bowmen in the fog are indeed the detested Pharisees and Sadducees of modern times.  They who aim and show their poison-tipped darts are rare hypocrites and self-satisfied soulless creatures, who enjoy the comfort of their government or corporate jobs and pensions and care nothing for the past or future of America or the world.

I am so happy that I know first hand, coast-to-coast, what their reality is.  They are the lawyers and government employees who love the Federal Reserve System more than life itself, and who revel in the “Brave New World” ethics of “truth” generated by internet diffusion and apparent but unreal numbers.  They do not appear in their own names because they do not dare, but behind childish “avatars” and untraceable e-mail handles (unless one knows them, as I know that former tenant and single mother from Florida).

The Victims of Foreclosure and Eviction know that America is in the midst of a Purge—destroying the Middle Class, and selling our homes and lands to foreigners by the thousands.  The Victims of Foreclosure and Eviction probably do not all realize that they were selected for this purge by their own government—by the Democrats and Republicans in Congress who favored easy credit and soft money—and that none are worse offenders than Senator Dianne Feinstein.  The Senate hearings on the mortgage crisis focused on whether the banks could escape the consequences of “robo-signing” forgery and proceed with foreclosures efficiently and expeditiously—the two major parties include few if any friends of the people, and all too many friends of Chinese investors in American realty.

But what of the millions of homeless people, in America, the inhabitants of the tent cities and “Extended Stay” hotels, uprooted by foreclosures and eviction?  They are in the extreme opposite of a jail. They are truly free, no longer shackled down by mortgages or rents or anything else.  Among their numbers are those men and women destroyed by divorce and child custody battles, destroyed by the declining income of the American population, impoverished by a dollar cheapened and weakened, oh yes, by the moneychangers, the international bankers, the finance experts and gurus, including their lawyers and the layers on layers of insanely oppressive laws and regulations which have made it cheaper and safer just to say “no” to doing business in America.

The bows in the foggy roads to socialism and dictatorship in America are many and varied, but they come down to a few key routes: (1) the destruction of the world financial system by socially engineering economists and business-strategists and lawyers, (2) the destruction of the Anglo-American legal system by those elite lawyers and judges at all levels of the State, Federal, and local judiciary, (3) the social-welfare/wealth redistribution system based on the triangulation of the Federal Reserve Banks, the Internal Revenue Service, and Social Security, and all the derivative Welfare Programs authorized under Title 42 and elsewhere in the U.S. Code.

The first key routes to destruction are pretty obvious.  I started my post-JD life working for Cadwalader, Wickersham, & Taft, and I am almost as proud of how poorly I fit into that New York hellhole of a lawfirm, with its exquisitely shiny, constantly polished marble floors, hardwood desks, embossed stationary, and managing partners whose incomes exceed the GNP of many third-world countries. With the prison-like imposition of uniform styles of dress on employees, even though the cost of dressing up to CWT standards on a weekly basis cost several times the annual Federal subsidy paid for state prisoners on a yearly basis.

“Legal education and the reproduction of the hierarchy” was the subject and theme of Duncan Kennedy’s “Little Red Book” of 25 years ago at Harvard, and it’s a marvelous read on the reality of the legal profession for anyone who doesn’t know it.  Kennedy hints at the futility of waging any virtuous wars through the legal system.  And that was BEFORE the Federal Judicial improvement acts imposed all those negative “case statistic” incentives on judges to dismiss cases and lower case loads as a major policy priority.

But the third branch of the road to socialism is the real highway, and the Federal and State government programs of taxation and welfare benefits are only part of the picture.  To really understand the evils of “welfare” we need to look at the imposition of government “benefits” such as compulsory marriage licensing, divorce, and child protection services, as well as compulsory education, compulsory driver’s licenses, and mandatory bar integration.   The government really and truly seeks to extend its tentacles into every aspect of our lives.  The government must be stopped.

Sometimes it does require the expertise of those who have been victimized by the law to become the most effective advocates and instruments of changing the law.  I am such a person.  And besides. How can I help but do well in California?   This Golden State of beautiful people which exalts everything fake, that (incredibly) just managed to survive 7.5 years under the governorship of Frederic Austerlitz’ Austrian-born compatriot Arnold Schwarzenegger, and maybe they’re ready for someone who’s actually experienced the pain of a genuinely uncharmed life.   I consider myself really and sincerely beautiful, all 272 balding, out-of-shape pounds of me.  As Oliver Cromwell said, “paint me as I am, warts and all.”  When I was first hospitalized for tachycardia in October 2006, I told my assistant, “I’m too beautiful to die” and damned if I wasn’t right—I absolutely, positively was just too beautiful to die.  I could have died 6 years before that in Egypt, or, for that matter, two months before that in a terrible car wreck by the Suwanee River near Live Oak, Florida, or one of several other occasions I can think of, but every single time I survived.   To what purpose?  Maybe, just maybe, it was to show all the people with foggy intelligence who shoot their bows with poison darts at me that my authenticity can win, and that virtue is not just about pretending to be honest and beautiful, but of having an inward and spiritual grace which belies one’s outward and visible state.

If elected to the United States Senate I would conduct filibusters, be involved in 99-1 votes, and the news that someone like me was elected might just depress the Dow Jones Industrial Average.  That would be a good thing, because there is nothing more false than the notion that stock prices have anything to do with real productivity or prosperity. But whenever the powers that be line up against someone, threaten to shut down everything if a certain candidate is elected, you have to imagine that candidate has touched a raw nerve somewhere.

To elect someone like me would be good for the Hispanics of California and the United States because I am not only fluent in Spanish and steeped in their heritage and culture, but I have suffered by and chained to their brothers, sisters, cousins, and uncles who have been persecuted for their status as illegal immigrants, seeking neither more nor less than Frederic Austerlitz’ parents came here from the Austro-Hungarian empire to find in Nebraska or than Arnold Schwarzenegger came from post WWII Austria to find.  Those are two American movie-star icons, but their parents are indistinguishable socially and economically from the Hispanic masses who continue to be chained and oppressed in these United States, even in Texas where Ernesto de Zavala co-wrote and signed the Texas Declaration of Independence from Mexico in 1836, and served as the new “Anglo-Saxon” Republic’s First Vice-President.

Moreover, I understand the Native American as well as the Hispanic roots of “Mexican,” Central American, and South American “Hispanic” culture(s), and I would fight for the recognition of “Mexican Indians” as Native Americans entitled to all of the benefits afforded by the Constitution to Native Americans inside the United States.  I would fight for their right to the recognition of their separate and distinct cultural heritage and identity.  In fact, I would fight for the right of all peoples to their separate and distinct heritages and identities, because “one size does not fit all” either in the educational, judicial, or political systems.  True equality means and must always mean the freedom to be who you really are and not shrived of your identity.

To elect someone like me would be good for the African-American citizens of California for all the same reasons.  I have seen and shared the degradation of so many of their relatives in state and federal prison, and know that while Hispanics are famously imprisoned in massive numbers for their status as “repeat” illegal aliens, blacks have, in the past fifty years, been more the victims of the insane “War on Drugs” than any other group (Hispanics are a close second).

I know that Blacks and Hispanics both need courts where they can really and truly be assured of full and fair justice by judges and juries of their peers, and that the present system does not provide them with such courts.   As a United States Senator I would fight for the rights of all ethnic groups to maintain their identity while enjoying full equality by equal protection of the law, including equality of rights to preserve and develop their distinct and separate cultural identities by allowing legal communities to develop distinctive and culturally adjusted laws within our multi-cultural “umbrella” of American political society.   To the same degree that globalists would erase all boundaries of cultural differentiation and identity, I would fight to allow each people to maintain and preserve their identities for themselves.

To elect someone like me would for all these same reasons be good for the Jews and Armenians, Chinese, Cambodians, and Vietnamese, who have been the victims of long genocidal wars in the 20th century, and major wars of repression.  No candidate, certainly not Senator Diane Feinstein, realizes the incredible degree to which America Under the Patriot Act (and related portions of AEDPA and FISA) resembles the totalitarian dictatorships of Nazi Germany, Stalinist Russia, Maoist China, Pol Pot’s Cambodia, and Vietnam under several regimes, or how much of the equipment of mass roundups and deportation of populations assembled in modern America today resembles the technology of genocide inflicted upon the Armenians of Turkey in the first genocide of the 20th century or against the Jews of Central Europe during the most famous genocide in all history.

Truly it can be said that Earl Warren, as planner of the Nisei Camps, was the Adolph Eichman of the United States, and that his cynical, racially biased implementation and application of civil rights laws was to divide, conquer, and disperse the population of America during the 1950s and 60s. The resulting America is one in which civil rights have been reduced to almost nothing, where Federal Courts repeatedly affirm that so long as all people in this Country have the same rights as white people, it doesn’t matter how severely freedom is suppressed.

This ridiculous conclusion to 150 years of civil rights legislation remains on the books today and is large part of the reason why foreclosed homeowners cannot seek adequate relief or redeem their properties by litigation under 28 U.S.C. 1443 or 42 USC 1981-1982.  Civil Rights law should be entirely color blind, but groups should have the right to defend and protect their own customs, heritage, and rights.

And this is the final reason why the (former majority, of which I am a member) White Anglo-Saxon, Northern, Eastern, Southern and Continental European Californians would benefit from my election.  I would fight to abolish all inverse discrimination against White people in this Country.  I would fight to establish true equality under the laws, recognizing the protected equality and forced assimilation are by no means the same things.   In short, I would be good for all Californians except the Foggy Bottom Poison Dart Bow Shooting fat cats, who love the status quo because it is so easy to manipulate and maintain, and so comfortable with all their precious governmental and corporate BENEFITS…. including the right to look down on others who do not agree with them and seek to deprive the true majority of their rights, all by the use and implementation of a completely biased and unfair legal system which has forgotten all the rules of fundamental fairness, due process, and constitutional rights.

It’s called “initiative” (on the failure of compulsory education, welfare, and just about everything else)(also: Peyton climbed a tree)

President Murkey Muffley to Prime Minister Dimitri Kissoff: “Dimitri! Dimitri, I’m sorry they’re jamming your radar and flying so low, but they’re trained to do it. You know, it’s … it’s… it’s called “initiative!” From “Dr. Strangelove: or, How I stopped worrying, and came to love the bomb”, January 1964, Stanley Kubrick & Peter Sellers (originally scheduled for release on November 22, 1963—cancelled due to other events that day in Dallas, Texas).

Kathy Lawson just called from Palm Beach suggesting that we try to arrange to testify regarding state-licensed marriage, marital law, and dissolution before the Florida legislature next session.  I said I would be delighted.

I have had a horrible “summer cold” or upper respiratory tract infection of some sort or other this week.  But the work keeps piling up from all over and at least some of it must be done immediately or at least slightly on time.  And so, last night, when Peyton and I were up all night at Jerry’s Famous Deli on Beverly Boulevard working on filings in Texas, I was spaced out, dizzy, especially towards the end of our work session, and somehow lost the keys to my Westwood apartment.  The normal option would be to sleep on Theodore’s couch—where I always fall asleep anyhow, or down the street in Peyton’s spare bedroom, waiting until morning to get a replacement key from the Condo management.  But I suggested we stop by (at 4:30 a.m., to see whether any neighbors were awake to let me in—none were).  But Peyton saw the gigantic vine covered tree that led up to my balcony, asked me whether I locked my balcony sliding door (I don’t—never considered a five story apartment balcony to be much of a security risk or target) and within five minutes Peyton had brachiated from tree trunk to building ledge several times and let me in, a five story building being nothing to this chap half my age (I might have been able to do that at 27, but I’m not sure I would have made it look quite as effortless as Peyton did).  This is a tribute not only to Peyton’s youthful health and agility but also to something I see so very little of in anyone these days: it’s called “Initiative.”

The great dearth of initiative has been illustrated to me in my search for another assistant, paralegal, because we just have too much work for Peyton to carry the load all by himself.  I was interviewing a reasonably well-qualified woman in Brentwood the other night and she reacted in horror at the idea that she might have to do searches on Westlaw unsupervised, or have to review the Rules of Civil Procedure on her own to answer certain questions.  “I’m used to just going down the hall and asking questions every fifteen minutes.”  This is called the complete absence of initiative.

While convalescing from whatever it is that ails me, I have been reading Soldiers, Scoundrels, Poets, & Priests: stories of the men & women behind the Missions of California by David J. McLaughlin.  2004, Scottsdale, Az: Pentacle Press).

Chapter 13 of this book concerns Mariano Guadalupe Vallejo (founder of Rancho Petaluma and, indirectly, “Godfather” of the Northern California/Sonoma wine industry).   His father Ignatio Vallejo was apparently a wildly philandering sergeant in the Royal Spanish Army, born in Jalisco, New Spain/Mexico, who accompanied the troops who accompanied Fray Junipero Serra in building the early California Missions 1769-1985.  Sergeant Ignacio was at one stage compelled to marry a girl because she was of quasi-noble or at least “creole” (one generation from “Peninsular”) birth, even if she showed some gypsy-like behavior in running away with this Sergeant.  As I read I couldn’t help but wonder if this several-times jailed Sergeant (“Brigardier”) weren’t model for Don Jose in Carmen, but I suppose there could have been many like him…  Sergeant Vallejo’s conduct was apparently so reprehensible that the Padres of several missions tried to control him, to no avail, and, like Don Jose in Carmen,

In a West Coast version of the Horatio Alger Story, aka “the American Dream” the Spanish Army Sergeant’s son at age 29 became “Commandante General” of California in the Mexican and 17 years later of the “Bear Flag” Republic of California Armies.  During the short-lived California Republic, Vallejo commanded Sutter’s Fort, near Sacramento, just a few months before Gold was discovered—changing California history forever.

General Vallejo’s life was clearly a frontier life, legendary from and perhaps unique to the “Wild West” driven by his own incredible intelligence and personal initiative at every stage.  Long before he was a General, a revolutionary advocating admission to the United States, and even before he started viticulture at Rancho Petaluma in Sonoma, in 1834, Mariano Guadalupe Vallejo was personal secretary to the Governor of California at age 15, whose duties included keeping track of all state business.  In this capacity, Vallejo personally executed and recorded in his own handwriting (there being no typewriters or even government printing presses in Alta California back then the transfer of allegiance of that Governor [and all of Alta California] from Spain to Mexico in 1822).

However, I was actually struck by [and inspired to report here] a rather obscure footnote in this history—Vallejo’s Tutor.  A man of Vallejo’s stature could be compared to a Western American “Alexander the Great” and one could imagine that his tutor was an “Aristotle” of La Nueva Espana, or at least a dedicated Padre of the Spanish missions who might have seen some potential in the bright son of a rather rapscallious sleep-around sergeant.

But no, Mariano Guadalupe Vallejo’s tutor was an English “hide and tallow trader” by the name of William Hartnell, who taught Vallejo “English, French, and Latin.”  This must have been quite an accomplishment, done entirely from memory, on the part of Hartnell.  The book says that in the 1850s, Vallejo purchased his old Tutor’s papers from his Tutor’s widow “when no one else would buy them.”  Now, even if this “hide and tallow trader” carried a hundred  books with him on his journeys, which I would rather sincerely doubt he did, it is doubtful that he brought with him any instructional grammar books or dictionaries in any of these languages, so in the second decade of the 19th century, we have evidence of this man Hartnell, not engaged in any particularly “noble” trade, knowing at least four languages sufficiently to teach them to a young boy who would later serve (at 11-12 as Hartnell’s own clerk) and then by 15 be appointed as secretary to the Governor.

One wonders what child-labor advocates would say about all this.  Was Vallejo the beneficiary or the victim of being put to work at age 10 as a clerk?

Because there were no “welfare” laws—no prohibitions against child labor—Vallejo had the opportunity to distinguish himself as an early age.  There were no “public schools” in California during the years when he was growing up.  There are very few (if any!) graduates of California public schools today who would claim to be fluent in English, French, Spanish, and Latin.  If there are any such graduates—I wish they’d write to me because THEY are showing “initiative” to conquer the limits imposed by a welfare-oriented government and compulsory education.

I contemplate the lives of Mariano Guadalupe Vallejo and his tutor William Hartnell and I wonder if the likes of them exist anywhere in California or America today, and if not, why not?

Protected: I will run for the United States Senate from California in 2012.

This content is password protected. To view it please enter your password below:

The Agenda of Family Law in the United States (hidden in plain sight)

          What is the purpose of mandatory child support payments?  What do mandatory child support payments have to do with widespread domestic violence arrests?  What is the role of social workers (e.g. Guardians ad Litem) who promote adversarial situations between parties by (consistently) choosing to side with the parent accused of abuse?  Why is the role of contempt of court expanding in Family Law Courts?

 

          The case of Michael Jergins in Williamson County is still ALMOST unique.  He is the only judge I have ever encountered in the United States who consistently imposes sanctions for CONTEMPT for speech and thought crimes, crimes of merely truthful and sincere communication.  And I know of no two people who have been more severely punished for such conduct than I and Rhonda Moe (IIO Malmquist).  Judge Michael Jergins sentenced Rhonda Moe to four months in jail for giving her twelve-year old son a tape recorder to catch a certain Guardian ad Litem (Laurie J. Nowlin) in lies, and that certain Guardian ad Litem (Laurie J. Nowlin) sought contempt charges against Moe, which Judge Jergins granted. 

 

Judge Jergins and Laurie J. Nowlin less directly but equally effectively prosecuted me for speech and thought crimes including attending my (then) ten year old son’s scout meetings, attending lunch at his school (where I was a volunteer instructor in several subjects, Spanish, History, Geography), and discussing his level of contentment with him.  As a direct result, I did not see my son for two years (June 2003-June 2005, and not much contact even afterwards, since June 2005—until the past year anyhow).  It was Judge Michael Jergins, not alone by any means, but more than anyone else, who convinced me to fight forever and a day to reform the Family Code systems in place in Texas and elsewhere by abolishing them.  After all, in 1787-1792, when the Constitution and Bill of Rights were adopted, marriage was ONLY understood as a religious sacrament, and was therefore completely outside the realm of the government to regulate, and completely within the protection for religious freedom and freedom of association protected by the First and Ninth Amendments.

 

Now, unfortunately, I have just recently witnessed a Judge in Pasco County, Florida, threatening to terminate a fine mother’s parental rights for engaging in “inappropriate speech” in the presence of her beautiful, 8 year old daughter.  The “speech” in this case was not even TO her daughter, but in the front seat to another adult when her daughter was sitting in the back seat.  The “inappropriate speech” in question in this case was particularly interesting to me: the mother was telling a friend that she was going to make every effort to get her daughter’s social worker fired for incompetence, laziness, and lying.  And the Pasco County Judge in question considers this an act evidence of “extreme hostility” and uncooperativeness.  Oh yes, I forgot, we are in the Honorable Maoist People’s Republic of Amerika, where challenging a governmental employee charged with the duty of taking your children away from you so that the state government can charge the federal government exorbitant fees for providing “services” would indeed be an affront to the government.

 

But I digress, the first questions had to do with the general purpose of mandatory child support payments, a widespread cancer of (mostly frivolous) prosecutions for domestic violence, and the generally expanding realm of contempt of court.  To my mind, it is simple and direct: the government, even those whose political roots are in the so-called “Family Friendly” Christian right, such as Texas Attorney-General Greg Abbott, have decided to destroy the nuclear family, to atomize individuals, to promote domestic discord and residential instability, to decrease the effective autonomy created by ownership of private property, and to maximize the degree to which the individual either “owes” or believes he owes all of his happiness to (1) the government, (2) the large corporations who provide most of the employment in this country, but (3) especially the judges and judiciary and their cohort who are the least democratic and most authoritarian component of society. 

 

I charge that even the real corporate purpose of the social welfare system in the United States is this same agenda of destroying the family, private property, and the constitutional state.  I charge that the family court system, especially the mandatory wealth transfers implicit or explicit in child support payments, have no economic utility except to isolate individuals from each other and create adversarial positions in society.  Marriage has become a system of welfare by fiat in lieu of its former economic role as builder of private estates by contract.  There are probate and inheritance law parallels to this Family Code analysis, but I will reserve that for a future post.  In the meantime, I say it is time to wake up and smell the corpses of liberty, freedom, and justice, to bury the deceased and see them reborn for a new generation dedicated truth, justice, and freedom for all.

 

It is time for Americans to revolt against the dictatorial, communistic tyranny of Family Law Courts and wipe them off the face of the map, restoring the individual freedoms originally embodied in the First and Ninth Amendments to the Constitution.