US President’s weekly Yahoo News updates

Once per week, I consolidate comments I’d posted to recent articles appearing on Yahoo News. I share my views, written as if I actually were the US President. [I’m working on that.] The following were posted between Sept. 26 and today, though appear below in no particular order. As is my usual custom, if I open with a quoted item, that’s from the article itself.

I hope you enjoy all 14 of these mini-essays/comments.

ONE:

[I’ll open with one comment I tried to post, but which Yahoo barred.]

“It was about this time five years ago when political strategist David Axelrod sat down and wrote a memo…”

Seriously? Does anybody really buy that? The Unknown Mulatto of the Thin Resume got elected by passing muster with the Elite (some people call them Illuminati). They, for one thing, made sure the media didn’t savage the inexperienced candidate. In exchange, Obama promised increased activity in Afghanistan, basically maintaining Dubya’s GWOT initiatives. David Axelrod’s memo of encouragement had nothing to do with it.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

“Without the approval of the Elite way in advance, if Obama would have run and gained traction on his own, he would have been shot dead well before the election.”

TWO:

“….partly because the administration-backed National Transitional Council [Libya’s new rulers] can’t guard the weapons depots…”

Hmm…it’s more likely the NTC is simply looking the other way. Sorry, but I can’t hold back on this: I told you so.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

“Sin is punished one way or another – and the basis of our choosing winners (protecting civilians) was a lie from day one. And, yes, I consider the telling of falsehoods to be sinful.”

THREE:

Jack thinks [the USA’s] Founding Fathers created a “Constitutionally Limited Republic.” However, he’s overlooking the fact that nowhere in our Constitution is the creation of a single nation declared. The United States is simply that – a collection of states in a union. While it’s true this union is binding, it is really just that – a union of states (not a fusion into one state). Perhaps Jack would have been more accurate to claim, “our Founding Fathers created a Constitutional Union of Republics [plural].”

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

“I’m amazed at how many people gleefully point out that the US wasn’t intended by its Founders to be a democracy.”

FOUR:

“In a devastating double-blow to al-Qaida's most dangerous franchise…”

When I read openings like this, I think about Orwell’s Ministry of Truth [read: “Propaganda] busily cranking out the horse poop.

Killing two people (even high profile, so-called “leaders”) is not a devastating blow. What would have been more “devastating” would have been to capture both of them, try them for treason, and give them life sentences. What we did instead was create two more martyrs, which has quite the opposite effect than this so-called “devastating double-blow.”

Oh, well, at least we didn’t have any boots on the ground for this operation. Oh, wait a minute…yeah, I guess we did. Maybe the shorter list would be of those countries where we don’t have boots on the ground (sneaky boots or blatant boots). Are there any?

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

“This boots on the ground stuff is overrated…and it’s another way of saying we’re overextended.”

FIVE:

It won't matter who our next president will be. We’re too far past the point of no return, and it’s not even like our fate is in our own hands. The only strategies which will work are the only ones We-the-Sheeple won’t embrace – vote all incumbents out of office, and vote for independents when possible. We’re too programmed to abandon our addiction to the Dem/Pub Brand-Name labels. Advertising does pay, but oh at what a price!

And please stop making noise about Ron Paul. He's as much a believer in the Brand-Name system as are all the other pols. Why else do you think he couldn't have grown a pair and officially declared himself a Libertarian years ago - and stuck with it? It's simple: He's a political opportunist - nothing more, nothing less.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“Google these words: Pudding face GOP.”

SIX:

I never thought I’d agree with Dick Cheney on anything. But he’s right.

However, I issue a disclaimer: Even though Obama supports “enhanced interrogation,” I maintain that the US has indeed “walked away from our ideals [not to mention international law]” under both administrations regarding…yeah, I’ll call it what it is – torture.

Obama owes Bush an even greater apology: Since his behavior and Bush’s regarding our meddling in Iraq and Afghanistan are indistinguishable, Obama might as well own up to continuing Bush’s legacy. [Go on, come right out and say it, Mr. Transparency President: "I am Dubya II."]

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

“Obama’s fancy footwork in Libya was truly his own, but he was inspired by that master dancer – Dubya himself.”

SEVEN:

Ron Paul destroyed any chance he might have had to win the GOP nomination. Saying “we now have an accepted practice of the president assassinating people” will not endear him to the GOP rank-and-file.

Personally? I think our government engages in assassinations – at home and abroad – pretty much whenever they want to. Who can stop them? You? Me? The Constitution? The point is, a major candidate can’t come right out and say we’re behaving extra-legally. No matter what good points Ron Paul may have, his detractors will pound him to insignificance with this.

My beef with killing these two Americans [by means of a drone strike in Yemen] is strategic: Their value to al-Qaeda while alive is going to prove to be a lot less than their value now that they’re dead. Perhaps we wanted to remove these two threats – that’s one thing. But did we have to go and blat it to the entire world?

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

“I will try my best to understand our leaders’ morality; I will never forgive their lack of intelligence.”

EIGHT:

Andy Rooney? What a massive discredit to the field of journalism! But, come to think of it, his schtick wasn't ever journalism - it was entertainment. A useful stooge for the Elite - nothing more. Good riddance, Andy!

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

"Andy Rooney was a signficant contributor to our downward spiral as a nation, since too many people bought into this guy in a serious way."

NINE:

“AQAP has taken advantage of nearly nine months of sweeping unrest against President Ali Abdullah Saleh [of Yemen]…”

And what caused these “nine months of sweeping unrest?”  Maybe in part: Saleh’s people don’t think much of him cooperating with the US. I hope our intel orgs weighed the benefits of this high-profile killing against the costs to be incurred in terms of backlash.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012
"We're not very good at thinking ahead.”

TEN:

Hey, We-the-People, this actually simplifies our task. All We have to do is not contribute to any of the candidates, find out which candidates receive the most super PAC money and vote against them.

Wait! It’s even simpler than that. Vote against all incumbents, which of course means vote against Obama. Even if We detest the eventual GOP contender, vote for him/her (even Bachmann!) anyway. The only way we’ll teach our rulers a lesson is if We show they can’t count on us being so predictable.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“This should serve to encourage independents to run.”

ELEVEN:

The following is my response to Ronald, who had this to say in response to the item immediately above: “So then you've never voted your conscience? It's always AGAINST something or someone? "Teach our rulers a lesson" means nothing at all if you are voting FOR the lowest common denominator. And it simply continues the cycle of honoring mediocrity as excellence in our country.”

Ronald,

“Voting one’s conscience” doesn’t mean anything if the deck is stacked. “Voting my conscience” means voting for independents. But the deck is so badly stacked against them by the Dem/Pubs, they rarely even make it onto the ballot.

What our rulers are basically telling us is, “you have two choices – Democrat or Republican.” Unless we can break that monopoly, we’ll never gain access to independent candidates to any appreciable degree (which in my mind translates to “quality candidates not beholden to a party”). And the only way to break that monopoly is to show the Dem/Pubs that we’re not in their pocket – that is, that we can behave unpredictably.

As for your question, “It’s always AGAINST something or someone?” For a lot of people, that’s exactly what gets them out to vote in the first place; it’s called “voting for the lesser of two evils.” In that case, we’ll always be voting for evil, now won’t we?

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

“Sure, I’ve voted my conscience before, but I’ve gotten tired of throwing my vote away. Time to challenge the Machine with a truly effective weapon – unemployment due to loss of office.”

TWELVE:

Netanyahu is about to learn a very important lesson: “Even though being (the state of) Israel means never having to say you’re sorry, that doesn’t mean that Israel won’t end up being very sorry.”

I can understand how some Egyptians might want to exploit a power vacuum in the Sinai, since they might want some payback for all of those years the US supported Mubarak’s efforts to suppress his own people. And since Israel is a “friend” of the US, well…I’ll let you finish that sentence.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“What goes around, comes around – Karma 101.”

THIRTEEN:

[Concerning winning enough primary delegates to remain credible.]

“That translates into money and that allows you to keep going."

Candidates who can attract money end up becoming officials who owe favors. In response, We-the-People should adopt three basic strategies: Vote against the incumbent, vote against the candidate pulling in the most campaign “contributions,” and stop donating. What the Status Quo loves (and depends on) is our predictability and how easily we can be manipulated. [Didn’t the faux “controversy” over “Great taste!” vs. “Less filling!” still leave you with (after all the foam, uh, I mean "dust" settles) really lousy beer?]

I think it was the old movie “The Wheeler Dealers” that had this great line: “The money doesn’t matter – it’s just a way of keeping score.” That’s the way the Oligarchs think as they go after what they really want – not money, but power. If we lose our predictability, we can skew their grand plans.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

“I’m the only candidate who is refusing (and not even soliciting) campaign contributions. Google the words: GOP pudding face.”

FOURTEEN:

“And thanks to a lack of political consensus combined with Europe's unwieldy decision-making process, any new plan likely won't go into effect…”

The preceding sentence describes the US fairly accurately. My suggested remedy for both – the EU and the USA? A new governance system based on a model I created in the 70’s – actually, in 1976 in honor of the US bicentennial. Google these words for a description of CSR: Cross-Sectional Representational Representation.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

“Over the years, the main problem I’ve had promoting CSR is that people are highly resistant to change. Kind of makes you wonder how the US was brave enough in the early days of the Republic to go with something as radical as the Constitution crafted by the Founding Fathers. Have we lost our courage?”

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

Founder of The Independent Contractors’ Party

“Declare your independence by voting for independents. If there aren’t any available, vote against all incumbents – bar none.”

Contact me at bpa_cinc@yahoo.com

Running on empty, for US President

Psst…a couple of things on my mind today:

·         So far, I’m truly in this thing alone…just as I was in the last election;

·         I won’t accept campaign contributions;

·         Help Wanted: I could use a campaign manager and web advisor and…a female running mate (it’s in my contract that I seek the presidency with a VP-seeker who is a woman);

·         Renouncing my citizenship in order to embrace Greater Terra;

·         bpa_cinc@yahoo.com … that’s my e-mail address…ask and you shall receive.

Running on empty: So far, I’m truly in this thing alone…

As you know, I’m running for US President in 2012. You might not know – I have absolutely no backing. Not even “moral support.” And I’m not independently wealthy – only making $38K per year as a state civil servant. And I don’t have any connections.

So why bother – again? Yes, I had run in the last election as well. And I am running now same as I had back then – basing my campaign on ideas. I walked away from the last election with bragging rights: I can claim I was the only presidential candidate in the history of this country to run on the basis of a written contract. And I hope to use these bragging rights for another challenge in 2012. But more than rights will be needed – I’ll need the assistance of others who share my vision as outlined in other postings on this blog*.

On thing should work in my favor: Barack Obama has massively disappointed a lot of his early followers – the ones who bought into “Change you can believe in.” Now, more than ever, I’m hoping voters will come to see the value of my chief message: Unless we elect independents to Congress and the presidency, we will eventually be destroyed by the two-party system, a far more dangerous threat than the GWOT.

The potency of The Electoral Contract of Steven Searle

Do not underestimate the power of candidates giving their word to voters by means of a written contract. I think our citizens are fed up with lying politicians – even those who lie by claiming to be practical by appealing to “the center.” I sense that people yearn for a man of his word – one who is willing to bind himself to his word. Someone who doesn’t end up “surprising” his initial supporters with over-the-top compromises (aka “sellouts”).

I am proud of my innovative contract that had listed 47 campaign promises, any one of which would have caused me to forfeit the presidency were I to be found guilty of nonperformance.

I felt this promise was especially appealing (#2 in my contract document):

“Within 90 days of my inauguration, all U.S. military forces will be completely withdrawn from Iraq and Afghanistan, regardless of the ‘situation on the ground.’ This withdrawal also applies to any covert operatives currently in Iran.” [NOTE: All of my promises were like this one – involving decisions which I alone could make. That way I couldn’t weasel out by saying, “Congress didn’t vote for my proposal, so how could I be accused of violating my contract? I did my part”]

[In the case of this “90 days” promise, for example, I would not need congressional approval. As Commander in Chief of all US armed forces, I could unilaterally act to withdraw these forces as promised.]

During one of my few campaign speeches back in 2007, one woman in the audience of 30 informed me: “Campaign promises cannot be enforced in a court of law.” That’s when I informed her of the very first promise in this contract [and I quote]:

“If I violate any of the terms of this contract, I will be removed from office by means of impeachment. I hereby affirm, in advance, that I will not defend myself nor authorize any other party to defend me against any impeachment activity in the House or trial by the Senate. I further agree to a speedy trial – within less than 10 minutes, if deemed necessary by the Senate.”

I told her that she was right – that promises by politicians can’t be enforced in a court of law. Which is exactly why I chose to circumvent courts of law. Which only makes sense, since there’s only one way to remove a president from office anyway – and that’s by impeachment. As I told this audience: “Look, imagine this…if I actually win the presidency as an Independent, don’t you think the Congress (dominated by party animals) would seize upon any excuse to remove me from office? They would scrutinize my contract for any whiff of a violation – and then impeach me for failure to honor my word. I’m counting on my enemies to help me keep my word – for your benefit.”

In other words, I propose to use the system against itself to save itself.

I’m also counting on a lot of anonymous, ordinary people (like me!) to tune into what I’m saying and conclude: “This is worthy of support. I’m in. What can I do?”

I won’t accept campaign contributions

Election 2012 will set the bar at $1 billion to become the next president. We may or may not actually see any one candidate pull in that much. But the last election makes this prospect in 2012 a strong possibility. In any event, the winning candidate will be the one who comes closest to this mark – or at least that’s conventional wisdom.

And isn’t that sad? Doesn’t it sicken you a little when pundits gleefully report fund-raising stats as the primary season wears on?

This is an area in which I hope to set a new standard: I am intentionally refusing to solicit – and will not accept – any campaign donations. I want to stand in the sharpest possible contrast to those who buy into the idea that “we have the best politicians money can buy.”

The only concession I will make is to agree to be paid for any speeches I deliver and articles/books I might write. That, however, will be personal income which I will use to promote the ideas behind my campaign and the campaign itself. The only other possibility will consist of others – people not under my influence, pay, or control – who act on their own to advertise the merits of my campaign. I am counting on those people to spontaneously decide – without any solicitation by me – to rise up and spread the word.

Of course, that would mean I wouldn’t have any control over content or means of propagation. But…I can live with that.

In all fairness, I feel I must issue a disclosure here: During the last election, I tried my hand at fundraising – and came up totally empty. I suppose such a revelation should be embarrassing, but I don’t embarrass easily. And I hope my honesty here is appreciated.

Help Wanted

I can use a campaign manager(s), web advisor, and a female running mate. The lesson I learned in the last campaign – “Steve, you can’t do this alone.” One of my gravest weaknesses is lack of internet savvy – I don’t even have a website. And I don’t have any clue on how to use the web to attract public interest. As I wrote above, I don’t care about fundraising but “spreading the word” is crucial.

As for a manager and advisor, I am asking for volunteers who will work without pay. But these positions aren’t expected to be full time or to be held by only one or two people. For instance, anyone who can arrange a speaking engagement – even just one time – would be acting as a campaign manager. And there could perhaps be dozens of such individuals working in isolation, though coordinating with me at a distance if necessary. And I would eagerly accept help from non-US citizens – both within and without the United States.

As for the female running mate: That’s not negotiable. As I’d specified in my 2008 contract:

“I will not choose anyone to be my Vice President who is not a woman. Though I will insist that she present an electoral contract to the American people, I will not insist that it be a duplicate of my contract. In addition, I will allow her total freedom to operate within the capacity of her office as she sees fit, without supervision or censorship.”

Renouncing my citizenship

I am in the process of renouncing my US citizenship, for very practical reasons. Right now, I satisfy the requirement in the US Constitution that no person may serve as president except a “natural born citizen.” However, the manner in which I’ve chosen to renounce my citizenship would have a distinct advantage: I would do so in a way not recognized by US law. This is from one of the US State Department’s websites:

QUOTE:

Section 349(a)(5) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA)…is the section of law that governs the ability of a United States citizen to renounce his or her U.S. citizenship. That section of law provides for the loss of nationality by voluntarily performing the following act with the intent to relinquish his or her U.S. nationality:

“(5) making a formal renunciation of nationality before a diplomatic or consular officer of the United States in a foreign state, in such form as may be prescribed by the Secretary of State” (emphasis added.).

:UNQUOTE [http://travel.state.gov/law/citizenship/citizenship_776.html]

As emphasized in the quote (above), I could not legally renounce unless I leave the U.S. – which I don’t intend to do. If I don’t renounce in a foreign state, the US will not recognize me as a non-citizen. However, for the US government to attempt to dictate how I choose to sever my connection would be a violation of my personal sovereignty as implied in the Tenth Amendment:

“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.”

States aren’t the only entities that possess sovereignty – each individual has personal sovereignty as well, which could simply be called “choice.” And each of us has a right to define his personal loyalties. Also important: Our government derives its just powers from the consent of the governed. We make a big deal out of that particular sentiment.

My status as a “light being”

I have a friend who says we’re all light beings who got lost, and have to return to the light. I’ll spare you the particulars of her theology, but I consider the question of my citizenship to be roughly equal to this question: “Is light a particle or a wave?” In physics, the answer is “Light is both – in certain aspects it is a particle, in others it displays wave characteristics.”

In like manner: “Is Steven Searle a US citizen or a citizen of Greater Terra?”

In the eyes of the US government, I will always remain a citizen unless I follow their procedure to renounce. Of course, I could sue the government, claiming violation of my constitutional rights by disallowing my preferred method of renunciation: By means of either (or both) a legal notice posted in a newspaper or (likelier) as part of my formal documentation submitted to a judge who will be hearing my credit card case** on April 5.

But I will not bother to try forcing the government to recognize me as a non-US citizen, by suing in Court. Why should I? I would enjoy certain benefits by being “both a US citizen and not a US citizen.” I get to assert my personal sovereignty and stay put – the best of both possible worlds. The US government couldn’t deport me, since (under its own definition) I am still a US citizen who would still be eligible for the US presidency.

But in any de facto sense, I would no longer be a citizen since I would make a “declaration, on oath.” I’ll detail what I mean by that after you consider this:

QUOTE:

I hereby declare, on oath [my emphasis – Steve], that I…renounce…all allegiance…to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen; that I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I will bear arms on behalf of the United States when required by the law…

:UNQUOTE.

This quoted portion is what all immigrants must “declare,” in the process of becoming US citizens. It seems to me that the important part is to “declare, on oath,” so in order to shed my citizenship I would simply “declare, on oath”:

·         I will not bear true faith and allegiance to the United States, but instead do so to the world as a whole – that is, I declare myself to be a citizen of the Earth – or, using my own term, of Greater Terra. By “Greater,” I mean the world as it can and should be after we rid ourselves of the scourge of national sovereignties.

·         I can only support the Constitution to this extent: We have to have something upon which to rely until we hold a long overdue Constitutional Convention to write a new constitution.

·         I will not bear arms as required by law, since the Constitution itself (13^th amendment) bars military conscription as a form of involuntary servitude. Any “bearing of arms” I would do would not be required by law but only by the dictates of my personal sovereignty.

·         I never did “pledge allegiance to the flag,” since this is just another form of idolatry. So I couldn’t even recite the “Pledge of Allegiance.”

But…why renounce?

Why renounce? Why do something that would actually cause a lot of people to hate me? Not to mention, not vote for me?

My entire campaign for the US presidency is, in reality, an attempt to reach out to all world citizens in order to create that better world all decent people yearn for. And the only way for me to do that is by making a statement: “I’m no longer a provincial, tribal, exceptional US citizen; I embrace the whole world and seek the betterment of all of Greater Terra’s inhabitants – not just those who happen to live in my neighborhood.” Of course, for me to turn US voters on to this concept will be quite an undertaking – which is why I seek help from any corner of the globe.

Just “call” me

I want to open things up a bit by giving you my personal e-mail address: bpa_cinc@yahoo.com . Ask me anything you’d like or volunteer your opinions or campaign assistance. The Buddha is said to have mostly preached in response to questions. Though I’m not a Buddha, I’d like to try his approach. So far, on this blog, I’ve written about what interests me, while only guessing what might be of interest to you. But…it’s a big world out there with a lot of people embracing wildly varying viewpoints. And, besides, I’m a terrible guesser. So…I leave it to you to ask away.

I will assume, unless you say otherwise, that I am free to post your e-mail’s text and my response on this blog. I won’t, however, post your e-mail address or any personal info you might share with me.

Steven Searle for US President in 2021

Founder of The Independent Contractors’ Party

“We can do this – and should. 2012 is just around the corner.”

  * “other postings on this blog” – for instance:

http://ind4prez2012.blogspot.com/2010/09/written-political-contracts.html

http://ind4prez2012.blogspot.com/2010/09/zero-party-system-for-us-politics.html

 ** “credit card court case” –

http://ind4prez2012.blogspot.com/2010/11/tax-dodger-black-reparationist-or-both.html