Tag Archives: South Carolina

Scary White People in New Orleans ……(BOO!)

Do “Scary White People” in New Orleans support “the deification of Robert E. Lee” as part and parcel of “the false history of the Lost Cause?”

No? Well, I don’t think so either, but those were some of the more memorably idiotic lines uttered (the first by only one speaker that I heard, but the second two were repeated several times by different speakers) at the twin meetings on Confederate Monuments in New Orleans earlier today, Thursday, 13 August 2015 at City Hall, 1300 Perdido.

The whole day was frustrating and infuriating. I stayed for all of the first meeting but not the procedural votes afterwards, went over to Tulane to do some library work and returned in the evening for the second session.

I finally walked out after an hour and a half of the second meeting that started at 6:00 p.m. (New Orleans Human Relations Committee) when some hopelessly misguided and unintelligent white woman was explaining how she told her second grade son that Robert E. Lee was a traitor. The same woman had just said that she wouldn’t dream of buying a house on Jefferson Davis Parkway and that Lee’s statue had always made her uncomfortable since she moved to the City in 2001.

Many (mostly black) people said that they felt the same way around statues of Beauregard, Davis, and Lee that a Jew might feel around statues of Hitler, Himmler, or Goebbels. These and other statements of those in favor of the removal of the Confederate Heroes’ and Battle of Liberty Place Monuments were so completely asinine as to qualify most of the speakers for the booby hatch.

But what the day was really about was the despicable level of historical IGNORANCE and cultural PREJUDICE, coupled with Political Opportunism, of the American People, or at least those who showed up at City Hall in New Orleans today seeking removal of the monuments to the Old South’s greatest generals and leaders….

First prize for best speech among the “Pro Southern Heritage” side of the argument goes to a beautiful lady with a French Creole name—who claims a 300 year old family lineage going back to some of the greatest names in New Orleans and Louisiana history all the way back to before the founding of the city.  This was exactly the kind of lady my Natchitoches-born grandmother had always hoped I would marry when I went to Tulane, but, alas, it didn’t happen, I went “Greek” instead). But this particular lady was full of fire and passion—and if she wants to run for Mayor I promise her 1000% support…

That was the short version of what I saw. What I felt was that a real race war, or at the very least a new and very hostile period between Stalinist mind control and historical manipulators and traditional Southerners.
 
The Stalinists were about 3/4 black and 1/4 white, while the traditionalists were overwhelmingly white with two or three reasonable black people daring to speak out.
 
I guess that “Stalinists” are predictably a nasty bunch, but these particular Stalinists were much more hateful than I expected—the lady “Latoya” who spoke about “Scary White People” was merely the most preposterous of them all. (The white people in presence were not scary at all—I wish they had shown a little more backbone—much too much apologizing and saying they hated the thought of offending anybody. If any word applies to the white crowd, it was “Scared.”
But Latoya was part of a “Take them all down” poster bearing click that was seated right behind me on the second row center behind the main public speaker’s podium, and they were vocally demonstrative and disruptive throughout, and I felt a great deal of hate from them and all who spoke against the moments.
 
I felt absolutely no hate among the white supporters of “maintaining the monuments,” just varying degrees of frustration for the most part, but I did feel a great fear on the part of the white people—fear of being called Racist or White Supremacist, fear of being called “traitors” perhaps.
 
Only one white person (and I can’t even say it was me), talked about the Stalinist mood of the event…..
As the evening ended, one bright clarion bell of hope sounded: Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal has declared his opposition to taking down New Orleans’ Confederate Monuments—it would be strange indeed for Hindu-American ethnic Bobby Jindal to turn out to be the savior for the monuments repeatedly decried today as monuments to White Supremacy and White Racism….and to the suppression of all black and brown peoples….
So who knows?  Maybe, just maybe, like Dinesh d’Souza, Indians have a better perspective on the cycles of caste, conquest, and colonialism even than do most Americans, black or white….  though that certainly would NOT explain the offensive behavior of Nikki Haley, the Governor of South Carolina, another Hindu-American…….

A dialogue on Texas Family Law and Texas Family Courts……restating my oft-stated position….

▪   CEL III      …he might see how psychology is used as a tool of social oppression and control…. just as in the movie, just as in Texas Family Courts—I was hoping I’d get a reaction from you on that point since you have some experience there….

▪   
11:10pm      Ellyn Trayne  What is your specific objection to the Texas Family Code or do you object to all of it?

▪   
11:21pm      CEL III          A series of closely related and interlocking concepts:
(1) Judicial Discretion knows no boundaries in Family Court.
(2) The entire bill of rights is subordinate to this jurisdiction and “the best interests of the child” is the most cynical standard of decision in the world.
(3) Family Courts routinely suppress procedural as well as substantive due process rights.
(4) (Relating to my former friendship and deep admiration for Valorie W. Davenport): Texas USED to have the strongest protection for First Amendment rights in the entire United States (as the Texas Supreme Court affirmed in Davenport v. Garcia—her first big case). 
(5) Family Courts routinely ignore that and will punish parents (and children even) for purely expressive, communicative acts.
(6) The Family is the Template for the Larger Society, and when the rights of individuals can be trampled inside the home, as between the most private and personal relationships of one family member to another, they effectively have ceased to exist for society as a whole.
(7) On a broader historical level, I believe that the First Amendment was enacted in large part to prevent the Anglican Book of Common Prayer (my Church, oddly enough) ever from being enacted at the Federal Level—my interpretation of the phrase “respecting an establishment of religion” is that it would be construed to bar Congress from legislating on ANY topic covered by the Church of England’s Book of Common Prayer. This clearly excludes all aspects of marriage, childbirth, education, and family life: it should be absolutely outside the realm of Federal Power.
(8) If we accept the doctrine of “incorporation” of the First Amendment promulgated most enthusiastically by the Supreme Court between “Gitlow v. New York” 1925 and “Lemon v. Kurtzman” in the early 1970s (several cases, Lemon I, Lemon II, etc.) but clearly reaffirmed in the recent Second Amendment cases, “D.C. v. Heller” and “MacDonald v. City of Chicago“, the STATES are likewise forbidden to legislate in ANY are covered by the Book of Common Prayer of the Church of England, which is roughly co-existensive with the Seven Sacraments of all Christian Denominations which keep to the Sacraments…
(9) And yes, this IS my “Short Answer” to your question…. if you were ever to work with me, you’d get to know the longer version…. (lol!) after about a year or so…. because I’m very passionate about it.

▪   
11:30pm          Ellyn      The Family Courts, like all other courts, and lawyers are for the most part corrupt. It is no longer, or maybe never was, about the “best interest of the child.” Judges need money for elections. Lawyers that give lots of money to a judges reelection campaign typically get the law contorted in whatever manner to their favor, regardless of facts or best interests.

▪   
11:36pm       CEL III       It’s just that the standard of decision, “Best Interests of the Child” is so vague and amorphous it gives maximum free reign, I think to that omnipresent tendency towards corruption. In some fields there are still fairly rigorous standards of proof, although it seems that those fields are pretty much only occupied by those fields of law controlled exclusively by extremely large and wealthy law firms like the first one I worked for when I first finished my judicial clerkships (Cadwalader, Wickersham, & Taft) or the ones that two Tulane (2L) girls sitting next to me at Kyoto at 4920 Prytania were talking about last night at dinner—one was going to Jones Day and the other to Hogan & Hartson…. they made me positively ill talking about the rigors of shopping to impress their bosses and colleagues at these firms. “To hell with the law, to hell with justice, to Hell with absolutely everything we’re working for $10,000 a month this summer so that we can go SHOPPING.”

▪   
11:38pm     Ellyn         What legal standard would you consider more reasonable in determining child custody?

▪   
11:43pm      CEL III      Don’t you get it? I don’t think the State Courts have any business being involved at all, with the sole exception of where there is a contract between the parties—an actual, written contract. I want to go back to a world where people have to depend on their parents, and on each other, for honorable behavior. In this sense, I guess, I am a true anarchist: I simply do not believe that State Court Judges should be able to invade the private precincts of family life at all. I think these are the realms of life left up to the people, and such “Non-Governmental Organizations” as they might voluntarily imbue with dispute-resolution power, and I guess by “NGOs” in this case I mean primarily Churches. I take a radical position because I believe that the Family Courts do only harm and no good. I really and truly, honestly and sincerely, have never seen a Family Court right any wrong or make any bad situation better. I have seen Family Courts drive people to do bad things who would not have done them otherwise. Effectively, these Courts were the first front, I think, for trying to drive ordinary people stark raving mad….

▪   
11:46pm       CEL III        When I say that “the Texas Family Code is Unconstitutional,” I basically mean that, in addition to being incompatible with the Federal Bill of Rights, the existence and practice of the Texas Family Code and the Texas Family Court system are even more incompatible with Article I, Sections 1-29 in particular. (Some of the recent amendments are pure crap, I admit…)

▪   
11:46pm          CEL III       But the Texas Bill of Rights really is MUCH stronger than the US Bill of Rights, incorporating as it does many provisions of the English Bill of Rights Adopted in 1689…

▪   
11:48pm            Ellyn Trayne     Well, I am afraid I think a lot of children would not be alive today, if the fathers were not ordered to pay child support.

▪   
11:49pm             CEL III     Well, you know, that’s because of the general breakdown of the Family, isn’t it? When a woman’s parents are divorced, and she has no home to return to for whatever reason, the Family Code becomes incorporated into Title 42 of the United States Code as an element of the Welfare System…

▪   
11:49pm             CEL III       Can you name, perhaps, the most famous Deadbeat Dad in all of Texas History, revered in song and story, mythologized in movies?
Possibly the most famous deadbeat dad in all of United States/North American history?


(Hint, he died in March 1836….. )

▪   
11:52pm         Ellyn      Bowie, Crockett? I’m guessing here.

▪   
11:54pm         CEL III        Well, you’re very close, but no…. I think it would have to be Colonel William Barrett Travis of South Carolina. His children all survived because their mother went back to live with her family on their farm/plantation—that’s just how people lived back then. It goes to the root definition of the relationship between Freedom and Responsibility. When the people depend on government to arrange their most private affairs, they are no longer free….

▪   
11:55pm         Ellyn Trayne      But with the breakdown of the family, some protections needed to be put in place to protect the mother’s rights.  
Hey you said Texas.


  Scratch that, you said Texas History.

▪   
11:56pm            CEL III     Question of chicken and egg: the breakdown of the family was CAUSED by governmental regulation promoting the same…. the family could possibly begin to regenerate if the State were kicked out of the home…. What do you mean by “Hey you said Texas.” ?? …


11:58pm           CEL III     William Barrett Travis is most famous as commander of the Alamo, author of the letter “We are besieged by six thousand Mexicans…. I will never surrender or retreat.”

South Carolina only needs another 800 signatures on ONE of its petitions for secession—Please help the Palmetto State, homeland of secession in 1860, Petition the Whitehouse for its Independence (again)—in Memory of Strom Thurmond and Frances Marion, the Swamp Fox—SIGN FOR THE BONNIE BLUE FLAG THAT BEARS A SINGLE STAR!

WE PETITION THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION TO:

Peacefully grant the State of S.C. to withdraw from the United States of America and create its own NEW government.

As the founding fathers of the United States of America made clear in the Declaration of Independence in 1776:

“When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.”

“…Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, that whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or abolish it, and institute new Government…”

Created: Nov 10, 2012

SIGNATURES NEEDED BY DECEMBER 10, 2012 TO REACH GOAL OF 25,000

800

TOTAL SIGNATURES ON THIS PETITION:

24,200 as of 12:56 am Pacific, November 24, 2012

You’ve already signed this petition

If Senate Bill 1867 Passes—it REALLY is time to purge the Senate of All Supporters of Indefinite Detention in any form for anyone under the power of the American Government!

INDEFINITE DETENTION WITHOUT TRIAL FOR ANY REASON IS FAR WORSE THAN ANY OTHER CRIME THAT COULD POSSIBLY BE COMMITTED.  No amount of murder or mayhem committed by one or more random terrorists can equate with transforming America into a Police State, and our entire population into prisoners, or so I believe, just as Patrick Henry argued at St. John’s Church in Richmond on March 23, 1775 just four weeks before the first shots of the American Revolution. And so I will believe and maintain until the day I die.  I cannot believe that any Senator who claims to be an American, much less a Patriot, would vote for Senate Bill 1867.  Has it passed by the time you read this?  If so, then America is in even deeper trouble than I knew…  Apparently, all that has definitely happened at this point is that the ameliorative amendments proposed both by Democratic Senator Mark Udall of Colorado and Republican Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky (which would have removed the indefinite detention provisions) both failed:

http://democrats.senate.gov/2011/11/29/senate-floor-wrap-up-for-tuesday-november-29-2011/

Senate Floor Wrap Up for Tuesday, November 29, 2011

NOV 29, ’117:36 PM
CATEGORIESWrap Up

ROLL CALL VOTES

1)      Mark Udall (CO) amendment #1107 to S.1867, the DoD Authorization Act; Not Agreed to: 37-61

2)      Paul amendment #1064;  Not Agreed to: 30-67 (60-vote threshold)

So the title of this 700 page bill is “Department of Defense Appropriations” but what certain sections of the text do is to destroy the last vestiges of the Constitution in this Country forever.   Whatever was not wiped out by Newt Gingrich in 1996 as part of the “Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act”, whatever survived the carnage of the 2001 “PATRIOT” Act, and subsequent renewals, and the 2007 Real ID Act, will be obliterated by S1867-PCS (Indefinite Detentions in the Defense Appropriations Bill 11-29-2011).  Please take note of sections 1031- 1032 and of course 1033 and 1034 in particular….

Some say this monstrous bill has already passed (http://www.examiner.com/political-buzz-in-charleston-sc/jim-demint-votes-to-give-federal-governmnet-controversial-new-powers)(giving a tally of votes including, of course BOTH of California’s Senators Boxer and Feinstein voting in favor) but I can’t verify whether it has or not as of 1:42 AM on the Senate’s official website: 

http://www.senate.gov/pagelayout/legislative/b_three_sections_with_teasers/active_leg_page.htm

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d112:s.1867:

Proposed by “Democratic” Senator Carl Levin of Michigan and supported by Arizona’s John McCain and South Carolina’s Lindsay Graham (both Republicans), this monstrosity would undermine the very notion of freedom in America.  It must be stopped.  Every senator who votes or has already voted for this bill must be removed from office—NO EXCUSES, NO EXCEPTIONS.

At this moment I would particularly like to challenge a former associate of mine, Dr. Orly Taitz, D.D.S., Esq., to answer whether she would have voted for S. 1867 or not if she were a United States Senator?  I submit to you that whatever her answer, Orly most likely would have voted for it exactly as California’s current Senators Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Boxer appear to have done.  This is what delineates a real Patriot and a Real Constitutionalist from a fake: so ORLY, COME OUT AND I DOUBLE DARE YOU TO TELL ME, AND THE PEOPLE OF CALIFORNIA, that you would vote against the Defense Appropriations Bill to Prevent this criminal abolition of American Civil Rights from becoming law.  I dare say that none of the allegedly Republican Candidates for Senator announced for 2012 would have voted against this bill at all.  It is time to Purge the Senate of all who support indefinite detention in any form by anyone acting under the Power of the American Government.  ORLY, WHERE DO YOU STAND?  With real Patriots or against them?  

I confess that, on reflection, I believe that Orly Taitz’ stand on constitutional eligibility for President: namely that a Presidential Candidate be required to present a certified long-form birth certificate, is terribly reminiscent of the “Real ID” Act of 2007—where do you stand on that, Orly, should every American have to prove Identity beyond reasonable doubt?  Is Identity not an Element of Freedom?  The simple truth is: wherever he was born, Obama is a Socialist bordering on being a Communist, and he obviously aspires to absolute power and dictatorship.  IF the American people could get over the fact that he’s black AND went to Harvard and taught at the University of Chicago (which isn’t really all that unique a set of credentials, honestly, some people have very similar resumés even though they aren’t black, for instance—I’m one of them)—IF the American people could get passed the idea that you just have to vote for a nice-looking black man and that NOT to do so is racist….well, the people of the United States might just be able to focus on the facts that Obama is totally wrong for America and totally out of sink with American values, whether he was born in Hawaii, Indonesia, Kenya, or some as yet unspecified place in the shifting sands of Waziristan.  It’s what people are, what they stand for, and do that should matter most.  THAT is the American way.  Obama has NEVER done anything except support Communism and/or Socialism advanced by Central Banking Systems, exactly according to the model of the Communist Manifesto of 1848.

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