Let's Get Honest! Absolutely Uncommon Analysis of Family & Conciliation Courts' Operations, Practices, & History

Identify the Entities, Find the Funding, Talk Sense!

Government– Same Turkey Outside, but Who Changed the Stuffing?

with 2 comments

I think that “Government” has been Gutted & Stuffed with Nonprofit/For-profit Alliances.  How about you?

So what does the word “government” mean to you?  

How hard have you thought about it lately?

~ ~ ~ ~

Does it mean something funded by taxes,

managed by people accountable to us

(the people paying for it)

and which only collects those taxes 

for the (essential) services it provides?

Below, the question is posed:

Do you own Government? Or, does Government own you?

Anyone know how to answer this last multiple choice question? Which is truth and which is myth?


Words have connotations and associations, but only after examining what they refer to, and seeing that reality in action (in motion — in process) can we understand the reality these words point to.  It takes time and attention.  But first you have to “find the thing!”

You can get to a slice of turkey, probably, in the USA somehow today, and have seen photographs, or even the live birds — but can you say that about government, although you probably interact with several of its body parts (in action, not on a roasting pan) in daily life.

To the extent you (or I) don’t understand who and what “government” is — you, and yours, and your offspring (if any) are very probably, the turkey (dinner, that is)….

Mine already were, which is why I write about these things….My current impression of “government.” (click or hover for more detail than you wanted…)

As I’m looking at it now, …. and have been for years … “(the last vestiges of representative) Government” has been Gutted & Stuffed with Nonprofit/For-profit Alliances.

I have deduced from the data that this is so, prior to finding others who came to the same conclusion, one of whose claims I’m posting and discussion here.

It appears that government has been gutted, and a stuffing mixed with nuts, nonprofits and for-profits (private corporate interests) has been inserted.  It has been baked til done, apparently, and served up, usually when demanding more patriotism or fiscal support, as a true feast of the people.

So many things have literally changed “government.”  Wars, the revision of the financial systems, science and technology, the tax system (enabling for-profit, not for profit status), you name it.  It’s hardly “Federal-State-County-Municipal” and that’s it.  It’s also much more than “three  branches of government in every state, just like in the federal government.”  Good grief, that concept is archaic.

Don’t take just my word for it, I’m just the messenger.  I see this myself, not just experienced, but the follow-up investigation.  I call the primary research.  People far more qualified than I in the very things I was researching (in a narrower application, though, i.e., the family courts) are in agreement, and they should also be heard. The heart of this post today was inspired from a January 2012 piece by Walter Burien (CAFR1.com).  However the lime-green-background intro, and this next quote, is from a January 2011 interview by Catherine Austin Fitts.  Neither of them bears any responsiblity for what I say, or how I interpret their stuff.   I just now good reason, and priorities when I see them.

“Essentially there is no government as many of us think of it.”

It’s beyond time more of us got our thinking caught up to the reality, and found accurate, relevant ways to say what happened, what is, and what that means.  Straight talk, as it were.

(I originally cited this over at “Why Baltimore’s CAFRs are MIA — “Audit Baltimore” Tells Us.”  I am not through posting on Baltimore.  Some of these interim posts simply are laying the table for understanding its issues (and relevance to our issues) better)

Quoted from:”Straight Talk with Catherine Fitts:  We are Victims of a Financial Coup D’Etat” by Adam Taggart, posted January 30, 2011
. . .the members of the Administration have no way of guaranteeing their safety and the safety of their families if they defy orders of those who have the weaponry and power to enforce their will by any means necessary.This means that essentially there is no government as many of us think of it. It also means that the governmental mechanism is quite fractured, with many competing interests that lack an organizing mission. They simply share an organizing imperative to control and concentrate credit and cash flow and to enforce the liquidity of currency and credit that makes the system go.Since WWII, the American economy has been “fiscalized.” By that I mean that {{#1}} most households, state and municipal governments, and local economies have become highly dependent on federal government credit, contracts, subsidies, and other forms of income and {{#2}} are heavily regulated by federal agencies. This widespread dependency on the federal financial mechanism is the basis for extraordinary central control.
Ms. Fitts also was quoted (this was an interview) as saying:
The federal financial model is institutional, and its ultimate governance is outside of the government. …the federal government lacks sovereignty.It lacks financial sovereignty– it is financially dependent on the banks that control its depository and slush funds, create the currency through the Federal Reserve and manage the accumulated capital of the same syndicates outside the government.It lacks information sovereignty as its data, information, and payments systems are controlled and operated by private corporations, primarily defense contractors. If we could dig out the true ownership of both banks and defense contractors, my guess is that it would look identical.. . .Between 1998 and 2002, over $4 trillion went missing from the federal government. During the Clinton, Bush, and Obama administrations, the US Treasury has consistently refused to produce audited financial statements, as required by law since 1995, or account for missing funds.This is two decades of financial operations run completely outside of the US Constitution and the law.In short, whether from the centralized private interests that own and control the federal financial mechanism or a large population that is financially dependent on it, the fundamental economics are institutionalized.

There is a chilling quote on this “straight-talk” interview, I am posting at the very bottom today.  For those who don’t know the Fitts story, there are links to the right.

Four things I really appreciate also about Walter Burien’s writings around the Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports and other economic/government matters:

  1. So far, from what I can tell, it turns out to be more than right…
  2. So far, from what I can tell, the ramifications of his information are enormous.
  3. Typically, he gets right to the point:  I found this out (the hard way), and at first just in more specific application to the family courts, not gov’t as a whole; it took me no time at all to figure out government wasn’t working as commonly understood, working from bottom up, and grants-system down; it was laborious and then convincing others who hadn’t looked, I lacked the short-cuts to the authoritative summaries — which the CAFRs, and the media blackout on them, by and large IS), 
  4. He points to information and where to get it that, along with many experiences, factually confirms that our own government taken as a whole (the “net summary” of its activities) is immoral (according to basic human values; thou shalt not kill, steal, commit perjury, cheat, and set your heart on taking things that really don’t belong to you, and you don’t need, either, a.k.a. “thou shalt not covet.”) and financially destructive to those it is charged with governing.  It is “iatrogenic” (the cure causes the disease), and as such, why are we holding allegiance to what are functionally, now government/corporation-sponsored FISCAL myths, and apparently no end to them?

This information have everything to do with MOST people in this country’s future possibilities for choice between freedom and survival, or slavery and genocide by degrees.  I think it’s time to pay attention.

What he’s been saying (it says, since 1998, but we know he’s been reporting this for longer):

Now the Key Question is: Do you own Government? Or, does Government own you?  How many governments exist in the United States?  (City; County; School District; Enterprise Authority; State University; Gov Pension; Self Insurance; Investment Pool; Self-Debt Funding )

As of 2007 TOTAL “Local” Government entities are standing at 184,000

CAFR1 – Walter Burien, since 1998 has diligently worked for you bringing forward into the light of day what you need to know about the collective scope of government finance and investments held. Operating funds are needed now. Government is not funding me to do what I do (why would they — he’s calling its budgetary bluff, as we all should!), in fact several from within government have taken much from me over the last ten years:


Who else would even know that a “Census of Governments” page even exists, think it relevant to the public, and post a link to it?

Here’s that 2012 Census, to become official in 2013.  A QUICK look there are literally more Special Purpose units of government than the traditionally known State/County/Municipal we tend to think of.  In fact if you want to look for government (not talking size, but quantity) — go look for the Special Purpose Districts:  I don’t know it this includes “enterprise authorities” or not (just found the chart).

  • 38.9K “General Purpose” (County & Subcounty [Municipal or Township) to
  • 50.0K(Special Purpose [Special Districts/Independent School Districts])

with a footnote this does NOT include two other subcategories (footnotes 2 & 3): 2Excludes areas corresponding to counties but having no organized county governments (see this post, Walter Burien, on Massachusetts). 3Excludes school districts operated by a state, county, municipal, or township government.  (i.e., only counts INDEPENDENT school districts.  Currently Alaska, Hawaii, D.C., Maryland and North Carolina have NO Independent School districts, acc. to this list.  Moreover, looks like Connecticut, a fairly powerful state (see “Yale”) has no counties, which means Municipalities are dealing directly with the state level.)…


You absolutely cannot judge a book — or a bird — by its cover.  You have to know what’s inside. Likewise, we have a sleeping (well not really sleeping) giant throughout this land. It needs to be taken into account.  Not doing so now is not a good option!  

And, “Let’s Get Honest” — if you see things thing in all its brilliant design, your own character and life is in the reflection.  For people who live and work in the US (although many of the principles apply in other countries as well) — you were there.  You contributed, you assented probably, and you were affected.

A look at what happened reveals the character and intents of Who Done It and most likely Why it was Done. The mainstream media is NOT going to carry this story line or set up a clearinghouse to discuss it, as they have clearinghouse websites on almost everything BUT this material.

Thanksgiving (USA) I often simply try to ignore them some years, to do something significant other yers.  It has been years, literally, since I had any hope of spending time with my own “family” (biologically) on this particular holiday.  I am thankful to be still hanging in there as a person and that at last count, all my kids were alive (other family members, I care rather less about, to be honest, nor am I morally or physically  responsible for having brought them into this world, as I was children, obviously).

No one, that I’m aware of, pays most of the individual bloggers who may have less slick sites — but just as valid material — on telling these matters.  How about some Thanksgiving that some of these are still alive, kicking, and writing?   I am!  there is enormous pressure to shut up and return to pretending, to conform with the majority in so many of these matters…

. . . . or to descend into partisan politics, or religion (or both).  However, I believe we just need to take a closer look at this bird, or rather “word,” that consists of the symbolic term, “government.

The WB commentary below has a certain color background and the borders, to distinguish it from information I dug up and posted checking it out!  Please share and teach to someone else (find someone appropriately distraught and activist about policy matters — or a taxpayer!) before the week is up!

He has comments about both Romney and Obama in this regard; Romney as to the record from Massachusetts, and Obama primarily in that he’s an attorney!  The State Commonwealth in question is Massachusetts.  I wonder how many really see and understand the significance of what Massachusetts did (in 1997 and 1999), or of this Commonwealth as a powerhouse of policy-setting in the US, given Harvard (“Harvard-Kennedy School of Government), MIT, the Kennedy Family, etc.

Massachusetts was the first to have compulsory education laws; it had many firsts.

Local governments consolidating into one merged power hub

by Walter Burien – CAFR1

I noticed this first per Massachusetts. The State consolidated control and ownership of all counties in the state by merger of all counties into the State. This happened over a decade ago in Massachusetts.

The ‘kicker” in addition to merger of the counties the “State” before this was done the “State” changed their government status from the “State” government of Massachusetts to the “Commonwealth” of Massachusetts. This transition was implemented by the “State” prior to 1995.

The big point here is that: “Private Associations” were used over the last 75-years to transition local governments from what we use to know government as into “Corporate” for profit enterprises and did so by direct consult over the years.

The structure of the “Commonwealth” of Massachusetts over the “State” government of Massachusetts, at the stroke of the pen overseen and checked off on by key player “Attorneys”, implemented the transition from a “government” entity into what could be more closely considered a “Private Association”.

The implications here are grave specifically as would apply to the transfer and masking of public wealth. The People own government, they do not own private associations. The same would apply to wealth transferred from “State” holdings transitioned into the “Private Association” holdings of the “Commonwealth” of Massachusetts..

Leave the liabilities under the “State” government shell and transfer the wealth holdings to and under the “Commonwealth” association.

This was done right under the noses of the Massachusetts residents and done without a clue given that it was being done to the Peoples of Massachusetts. The same is covertly taking place in NJ, PA, CT, and many other states.

The shell structure of government is being left in place as the wealth and stewardship responsibilities are transferred to the Private Association, or as in Massachusetts  case when transitioned from the “State” government of Massachusetts into the “Commonwealth” of Massachusetts.

Before the end of this post, this will be shown from the League of Women Voters of Massachusetts, the clearest illustration (with a map) I could find.  Inbetween we look at the financial statements and observe a few things about them, too.

While I was unaware of the specifics of Massachusetts above, I have spent a lot of time on-line researching court (shenanigans) in the “Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.”  And in principle, this makes sense — the privatization of government to the point that government itself is a shell, with different stuffing, but its gizzards, entrails gone, and a different mixture (tasty, flavorful, maybe — but different!) stuff back inside the carcase.

NOT a thorough check, but a quick reference to what he’s saying here — from the link to Commonwealth of Massachusett’s CAFRs (why such a variety in size of the files??)

Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports  Posted Month
CAFR 2011 pdf format of    CAFR 2011   file size3MB 1/6/2012
CAFR 2010 pdf format of    CAFR_2010.pdf   file size20MB 1/24/2011
CAFR 2009 pdf format of    Title_Page_and_TOC_Linked.pdf   file size1MB 12/2009
CAFR 2008 pdf format of    CAFR_2008.pdf   file size31MB 12/2008

COLOR CODING:  bright-blue-green (above) — Mr. Burien’s post.  Light-green (below), Massachusetts’ CAFR 2011; below that a section or two, deeper gray-green, information about Massachusetts in general (starting with the “DOT”).  Hopefully this helps keep the sources straight, within comments on this one state….

INTRODUCTORY SECTION (2011 — for links, click in the CAFR).

LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL…………………………………………………………………………………………..1

CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS ……………………………………………………………………………………..8


ADVISORY BOARD TO THE COMPTROLLER………………………………………………………………10

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS …………………………………………………………………………………………….11

see Organizational structure, and a footnote:

* Merger of 4 former state departments (Department of Labor, Department of Workforce Development, Division of Industrial Accidents and Division of Labor Relations) with the Executive Office of Labor and Workforce Development per Chapter 3 effective 3/11/11 but transitioned on 7/1/11

From the opening (Auditor’s Report/KPMG) about what they didn’t audit, and what % of assets & income these represent:

Mr. Martin Benison, Comptroller The Commonwealth of Massachusetts Boston, Massachusetts

We have audited the accompanying financial statements of the governmental activities, the business-type activities, the aggregate discretely presented component units, each major fund, and the aggregate remaining fund information of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts (the Commonwealth), as of and for the year ended June 30, 2011, which collectively comprise the Commonwealth’s basic financial statements as listed in the accompanying table of contents. These financial statements are the responsibility of the Commonwealth’s management. Our responsibility is to express opinions on these financial statements based on our audit.

We did not audit the financial statements of: (bullets added by blogger LGH):

  • the University of Massachusetts, the State Colleges and certain of the Community Colleges all of which are major enterprise funds and represent 87% of the total assets and deferred outflows of the business-type activities.
    • We did not audit 36% of the total assets and deferred outflows of the Community Colleges major enterprise fund.
  • We did not audit the financial statements of the Massachusetts Municipal Depository Trust which represent 5% of the total assets of the aggregate remaining fund information.
  • Additionally, we did not audit the financial statements of certain nonmajor component units, which represent 6% of the total assets and deferred outflows of the aggregate discretely presented component units.

Those financial statements were audited by other auditors whose reports thereon have been furnished to us, and our opinion, insofar as it relates to the amounts included for those entities, is based on the reports of the other auditors. . . . .

From ‘PRIMARY COMMONWEALTH GOVERNMENT: GOVT-WIDE HIGHLIGHTS (p. 21 of 2011CAFR) {{again, I’m separating some sentences; the original is one paragraph, prose/LGH}}

Net Assets – The liabilities of the primary government exceeded its assets at the end of FY11 by almost $18.5 billion, a reduction of $137 million in the net deficit from FY10.
Of the $18.5 billion deficit amount, “unrestricted net assets” is negative by $22.7 billion, and there is a $722 million deficit attributable to the investment in capital assets net of related debt for governmental activities.

There are two primary reasons for negative unrestricted net assets:

first, the Commonwealth has a liability of $6.8 billion for its share of the construction costs of schools owned and operated by municipalities through the Massachusetts School Building Authority (MSBA); second, in FY10 the Commonwealth implemented transportation reform, which created the Massachusetts Department of Transportation (MassDOT) and transferred to that entity virtually all highway and bridge assets of the Commonwealth totaling approximately $15.5 billion, net of depreciation.

The Commonwealth, however, originally paid for the construction of these assets and retains a large amount of transportation-related debt, which will now be unrelated to any capital asset owned by the Commonwealth. In addition, a large portion of the Commonwealth’s FY10 and FY11 capital spending is for transportation-related assets which are owned by MassDOT but the debt for which is retained by the Commonwealth.  These negative amounts are offset by nearly $2.9 billion in “restricted net assets”.
During the fiscal year, approximately $634 million in restricted net asset balances were set aside for unemployment benefits and an additional approximate $630 million was restricted for debt retirement. The MSBA also holds $597 million in assets restricted for debt retirement.

Total revenues of the primary government increased by $2.7 billion or 5.4% in FY11 compared to FY10. Tax revenues increased by $2.03 billion, or 10.7%, primarily the result of growth in the individual income tax.

Among non-tax revenue sources, primary government operating grants and reimbursements increased by $926 million, or 5.5%, in FY11, primarily due to a $669 million increase in Medicaid.

BACK TO MR. BURIEN’S January 2012 post, first let’s repeat the last paragraph and verify at least that  liabilities (debt) have been retained by the Commonwealth and the assets transferred to a component unit (not a “private association” per se, but still, notice the transfer), the DOT.   Compare:

Again, WB Statement, part 1:

The shell structure of government is being left in place as the wealth and stewardship responsibilities are transferred to the Private Association, or as in Massachusetts  case when transitioned from the “State” government of Massachusetts into the “Commonwealth” of Massachusetts.

Compare CAFR Letter of Transmittal Statement (more than once, this is from p. 2 bottom-p.3 top)

The deficit of $22.8 billion in government-wide net assets can be largely attributed to the Commonwealth policy decision to finance the construction of assets owned by other government entities, particularly Commonwealth roads and bridges, which as a result of transportation reform completed during FY10 shifted these assets from the books of the Commonwealth to the newly formed Massachusetts Department  of Transportation (MassDOT), a component unit of the Commonwealth. At the end of FY11, MassDOT held over $18.4 billion in road, bridge and other transportation-related assets (excluding assets of the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority) net of related depreciation, the vast majority of which were formerly held by the Commonwealth.

Those assets were financed by the Commonwealth and the debt remains a long-term obligation of the Commonwealth. In addition, the Commonwealth holds $6.8 billion in debt and grant obligations for the School Building Assistance Program that finances construction of schools for the Commonwealth’s cities and towns.

Since MassDOT ended FY11 with positive net assets of $23.8 billion, it is more informative to view the Commonwealth’s financial statements in combination with MassDOT than to analyze the two separately.

Shifting the assets to a component unit and leaving the liabilities with the Commonwealth also makes it easier to point out and sell “pay off this debt,” statewide.   The DOT is ruled by a board appointed by the governor:

In June 2009, Governor Deval Patrick signed Chapter 25 of the Acts of 2009, “An Act Modernizing the Transportation Systems of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, (as amended by Chapter 26 of the “Act.”) This landmark transportation reform legislation requires that the Commonwealth integrate transportation agencies and authorities into a new, streamlined Massachusetts Department of Transportation (MassDOT) to be established by November 1, 2009.

MassDOT Leadership

Governor Deval Patrick
A seven-member Board of Directors appointed by the Governor with expertise in transportation, finance and engineering will oversee the new organization, while serving as the governing body of both MassDOT and the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA), which will be part of MassDOT but will retain a separate legal existence. MassDOT will be administered by a Secretary of Transportation, appointed by the Governor to serve as Chief Executive Officer.The organization will oversee four new divisions: Highway, Mass Transit, Aeronautics and the Registry of Motor Vehicles (RMV), in addition to an Office of Planning and Programming.

When this transition took place about two decades ago, Massachusetts no longer produced a “State” government CAFR (Comprehensive Annual Financial Report). The CAFR was now produced under the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. The State Court  System and Financial operations were also transitioned into and under the same “Commonwealth” structure.

Mit Romney is the Presidential pick to be promoted by the syndicate being the prior governor of Massachusetts. He is versed on operating procedure to implement the same nationally. That will be his primary mission if elected President and thus the Syndicate is moving forward full steam utilizing all of their contacts and tactics to force Mitt Romney’s win as President.

I note Barack Obama as an attorney and as current President is attempting to consolidate through restructuring federal government into the same transition

Sounds like exactly what Mr. Burien just said, above:  They transferred the assets to a newly created entity (the DOT, Dept. of Transportation) and left the liability with the state as a whole, now unsupported by capital. In addition, there’s that school-building thing going on….

Regarding the State vs. Commonwealth situation, I’m not qualified to follow up on it yet, other than to note that four states are listed now as “Commonwealth” (MA, PA, VA & KY) and one resource noting that in the commonwealth, people do not possess land and mineral rights:

Commonwealth vs. State

 . . .As a basic rule, in the United States of America, commonwealths and states are treated the same under the U. S. Constitution.

. . .if you’re asking about Virginia, Kentucky, Massachusetts, or Pennsylvania (the four “states” in the US that call themselves a commonwealth), in a commonwealth landowners do not possess mineral or oil rights to their land. They don’t actually own their land but own its use. However this does not significantly differentiate their structure or self-government in any way from other states in the Union.

(If you want answers from wiki-answers, go ahead.  However Wikipedia on “Massachusetts” must refer to what Mr. Burien was saying, see reference to 1997.

I also tagged on a section about education (both history of compulsory education and institutions of higher education) as it’s a factor in the recent “Commonwealth of Massachusetts” current stated CAFR debt.  One aspect mentioned was the creation of the MassDOT.  The other, specifically, related to the MSBA (Massachusetts School Building Authority), again, the commonwealth gets the liability; someone else gets the assets:

Massachusetts, along with the five other New England states, features the local governmental structure known as the New England town.[178] In this structure, incorporated towns—as opposed to townships or counties—hold many of the responsibilities and powers of local government.[178]

Some of the county governments were abolished by Massachusetts in 1997, and elect only a sheriff and registrar of deed who are part of the state government.[179]Others have been reorganized, and a few still retain county councils.[179]


Harvard University and MITare both widely regarded as in the top handful of universities worldwide for academic research in a myriad of disciplines.

Massachusetts was the first state to require municipalities to appoint a teacher or establish a grammar school with the passage of the Massachusetts Education Lawof 1647,[180] and 19th century reforms pushed by Horace Mann, founder ofWestfield State University, laid much of the groundwork for contemporary universal public education.[181][182] Massachusetts is home to the country’s oldest public elementary school (The Mather School, founded in 1639), oldest high school (Boston Latin School, founded in 1635),[183] oldest boarding school (The Governor’s Academy, founded in 1763), oldest college (Harvard University, founded in 1636)[184] and oldest women’s college (Mount Holyoke College, founded in 1837).[185]

In 1852, Massachusetts became the first state to pass compulsory school attendance laws.[186] The per-student public expenditure for elementary and secondary schools (kindergarten through grade 12) was fifth in the nation in 2004, at $11,681.[187] In 2007, Massachusetts scored highest of all the states in math on the National Assessments of Educational Progress.[188]


LWVMA banner

Massachusetts Government: County Government (<==THE URL)

Originally, Massachusetts had 14 counties which were regional administrative districts before the Revolutionary War. Over time the counties administered jails, health facilities, agricultural schools, registries of deeds and probate, county courthouses, county roads and extension services. The counties were funded by local communities and the Commonwealth.

For many years, there was criticism of county government as wasteful and inefficient. There were recommendations to abolish all county governments and transfer most of their functions to state agencies and their assets (land and buildings) to the Commonwealth.***

In 1997, the county governments of Middlesex, Berkshire, Essex, Hampden and Worcester were abolished and Suffolk in 1999. Their functions were turned over to state agencies. Sheriffs in these counties still administer jails but their employees are state employees. The legislation to abolish these county governments transferred Registries of Deeds to the jurisdiction of the Secretary of the Commonwealth.

Registers of Deeds and probate, sheriffs and district attorneys, even where county government has been abolished, are still elected in county political districts.**** In counties which have not been abolished or restructured, county commissioners and treasurers are still elected. It is important to understand that counties as geographical/political regions are not abolished or restructured; it is the government which is abolished/restructured. Though the counties still remain, some county governments in the Commonwealth have been “abolished”, their offices being put under the direction of certain state offices. Example: the Registry of Deeds offices in abolished counties are now under the direction of the Secretary of the Commonwealth’s Office; Sheriffs and jails are under the Secretary of Public Safety.

Home rule legislation allows officials or voters in a county to establish a regional charter commission to study its government. The commission can submit one of three model charters for approval of voters in that county at a statewide election or it can submit a special charter which must first be approved by the state legislature.

Cities and towns may choose a Regional Council of Government charter which will be binding on those communities where a majority of voters in a city or town approve it. The regional council of governments can provide a variety of services to cities and towns, such as planning, public safety, engineering, water and waste disposal, and many other services. The participating communities pay assessments based on local property evaluation.

The legislature approved special charters to allow FranklinHampshire and Barnstable counties to become regional councils of government. 

BristolDukesNantucketNorfolk, and Plymouth county governments remain substantially unchanged.


{**** thus people who don’t understand that geographics/political regions =/= necessarily the same as “government”}}

If you carefully look at which counties stayed the same, on the map above (for example, the one with Cape Cod), which went regional, and which simply went under the commonwealth umbrella, it sure does get interesting….

I split a post in half (the next half illustrates government private association) and am going to end this one with Mr. Burien’s exhortation to get the attorneys out of public office.

After ten years in ONE of the court systems in ONE state, and having witnessed multiple “officers of the court” violate basic procedures, judges attempt to testify, refusing to let me cross-examine my own accuser, GAL uttering proclamations without evidence, and whether I had an officer of the court ON my side or on the other side, either way, our children and the family finances were worse off after (i.e., the very few critical times I (stupidly) hired one, and I know many mothers  sense this also, my rights were “sold down the river.”    None of them mentioned the things I MOST needed to know going in, including what, really, was that courthouse I was walking into, and how did it get jurisdiction.

It is up to us, the people, to find these things out.   Officers of the Court are just that — OFFICERS of the court.  That you also have an attorney/client relationship with them appears to be secondary.

As such, the real “crimes” in our society appear to be economic crimes — either not giving the government its complete privileges it wants (but hasn’t earned), or in the case of some of the more brilliant, but less traditional  — competing with their own racketeering setups.

These are harsh words, below (truth often is).  All I have to say is:  Is the ABA a nonprofit association?  Is the APA?  Is the AFCC? (which is rather a blend of them both)?  We really have to put a stop to this nonsense, or it’s each for our own in the future.

LOOK:  “Government” is basically a corporation, only operating under different rules.  It SHOULD be operating not as the largest infrastructure owner on the planet (yet not accountable or transparent for its own financial statements — and it definitely isn’t), not as the world’s largest jailor.  It SHOULD be restrained by the power of the people under its jurisdiction.   It is not going to normally exhibit such self-restraint — it is up to us to do so.  I’m sorry to keep bringing this up — but it should be obvious by now:  The compulsory education law is nationalization of indoctrination, and politicizing of truth.  Look  even at Massachusetts — its primary deficit, being a very small state (about 8,000 square miles) — includes “MSBA” (School Building Authority). . .   It’s an elitist mentality that says the federal government should be raising the nation’s children.  I personally find that offensive.  It’s no longer cost-effective, and it’s become a major monopoly.  Kids are getting sometimes raped and molested in schools (sometimes by their superiors — teachers, coaches, etc.) as they have been for centuries in the religious institutions, and/or boarding houses.    Maybe we need fewer institutions, a simpler model, and definitely less tax burden.

Anyhow, here’s one person’s suggested alternative:  Tax Retirement Funds.  I’m neutral on this (haven’t looked into it; one thing at a time).  I have spent my entire life, mostly, in this country, and as a woman, a student (a very good one) a professional (ditto) a mother (ditto) and towards the latter part of my life I asked ONLY one major set of services:  I asked help to get out of a violent relationship, and thereafter enough safety to support my own household.

That was not to be — we are too centralized, too federalized, too “religionized,” and moreover, (which I will demonstrate in a post pretty soon) our kids’ social security numbers are a source of unbelievable money laundering and fraud ESPECIALLY in systems which take federal funding.  This has to stop — the kids aren’t profiting from it — someone else is, and deceitfully so.  I will get the link up.

This is the remainder of Mr. B’s 1/18/2012 post (I didn’t see it before today).  I have not met this person and no funds have exchanged between us (I get the sense that neither has many to exchange). I’m sure he’d appreciate any help — and I know I would — in getting this information out, or simply for the time we’ve put into presenting the material — now that is philanthropy.

Getting huge tax-writeoffs in exchange for, sometimes literally, a seat in government or setting policy for hundreds of thousands of others (without their informed consent, or their voices at the same policymaking “roundtables”) is not real philanthropy — that’s just wealth preservation for the already wealthy.  More on my next posts…

This communication needs to go viral in all circles. Let all comprehend what is taking place right in their face and under their noses.

For government to be: “For the People by the People” this transition needs to be stopped cold in its tracks and reversed. It is well under way and if the roots of its structure hold it will no longer be: “For the People by the People” but For the Association by the Association” under the direction of the association’s minions of attorneys direction.

As quoted from the front page of CAFR1.com as the bottom line at the end of the page:

“It appears that many attorneys have now taken over the House, Senate, and Governor’s office. The separation of powers doctrine mandates attorneys being officers of the court (Judicial branch) that they should not be able to run for public office (Executive / Administrative branch)

Stop this now!

The ROOT of the corruption / graft / destruction of our country is coming from this breeding grounds. Here is why you are being bled dry! The very corrupt from the judicial branch have slithered their way into elected and appointed positions within the executive / administrative areas of government.

Again, it is the nature of this beast to bleed you dry, if they can that is..

If you from this point forward VOTE for an attorney running for office, you are more than foolish, you aid in the assured degradation  and plunder of your own country.

Remove these attorneys from public office NOW! Mandate a ten year lapse from being an officer of the court BEFORE an attorney can run for public office and ten years after leaving office. This is a must to do NOW. It is NOT an option. Make this the LAW NOW in your City, County, and State. You now know why you are being bled dry. It is the NATURE of this beast. 


– – –

Sent FYI and for your action from,
Walter Burien – CAFR1
P. O. Box 2112
Saint Johns, AZ 85936

Tel. (928) 458-5854

Any local government can be restructured to meet their annual budget needs “Without” taxes. TRF (Tax Retirement Funds) providing the revenue source to pay every City, County, State’s general purpose annual budgetary needs!

The quote from “Straight Talk with Catherine Fitts,” referenced near top of this post (just under the double-column table with very bright green background).
I have been dealing personally with certain individuals, on a lower level obviously, for whom this statement applies. The attitude is absolutely chilling — and it is completely lawless.

Like (according to the quote, then-President George W. Bush) said individuals are simply not interested in the facts — but in loyalty.   Discussion of the “facts” in question between us was answered repeatedly in terms of my agreement with or disagreement with the status quo; I was an ingrate, etc.  My point of view or real needs were absolutely off the table without constant reminders of the “loyalty” issue — when I see no reason for personal loyalty to people whose values I don’t share, and have demonstrated their priorities enough previously that, to put it mildly, I want OUT of association with such a crowd.

From the book quoted below:

George W. Bush: Bush places personal loyalty over loyalty to the truth

It seemed, suddenly, that there were no “let’s-look-at-the-facts brokers” in any of the key White House positions. A strict code of personal fealty to Bush–animated by the embrace of a few unquestioned ideologues– eemed to be in collision with a faith in the broader ideals of honest inquiry. Even quite junior staff would sometimes hear quite senior staff pooh-pooh any need to dig deeper for pertinent information on a given issue.Source: The Price of Loyalty, by Ron Suskind, p. 125 & 171

FYI, much of my understanding and fascination with the process of government has come from contemplating this personal situation which has been driven — as far as I can tell — by a few individuals who, literally, talk out of both sides of their mouth, but whose message is utterly clear. They seek absolute authority, and punish noncompliance, but maintain the facade (until crossed) of “concern” and wanting “collaboration.” The words coming out of their mouths are in direct contrast with the deeds — but this cannot be seen unless both are placed side-by-side, IN context, and in a chronological order. In that light, the words can be understood.

From what I have come to understand, over time, I absolutely do not believe that this country is willing to stop domestic violence or child abuse. We want someone else to — but the same government that we want to do this — is a perpetrator and operates on a ground-level of extortion, centralization, put-down of authority, beyond the law itself, while talking about collaboration, cooperation and so forth. There is an utter double-standard.

It is not time to be asleep, full of the “stuffing” (mental, psychological, rhetorical, etc.) of what has been fed and served to us for years as “government,” i.e., “the good guys.”

  • Call no man good. There is none good but God” (Jesus, allegedly, in response to a flattering “Good Master….” question).”

OK, then how about this?:

  • Good God! Let us acknowledge that there’s none good than You, and quit worshipping, serving, feeding off of, trusting, and sacrificing our kids and (such as they be), fortunes, loyalties (etc.) to anything else. A healthy acknowledgment that most of us AREN’T that good, hence balance of powers, has to happen. We have let it get centralized entirely out of hand [[hey, change of attitude has room for a little repentance, facing the truth, right?]] and quit assenting to institutionalized idiocy, as we are able, and as we find opportunity.” (Let’s Get Honest, in response to the situation).

Here’s that quote. In the original, there is a broken link to the book quoted, this one:

I put some red font in here for emphasis:

I refer to this as a “financial coup d’état.Wall Street and Washington issued trillions in fraudulent securities, used it to gain control over trillions in assets, and then were able to engineer the taxpayers refinancing out the fraudulent paper. Think of this as a leveraged buyout of a planet.To the victors go the spoils. That is why we are seeing the people who engineered the coup so richly rewarded.Richard Dolan has referred to parts of the military industrial complex as “the breakaway civilization.” That is a good description as we now have groups that have stolen trillions and are confident in their ability to keep it.

I am reminded of a story from Ron Suskind, former Wall Street Journal reporter in his book The Price of Loyalty: George W. Bush, the White House, and the Education of Paul O’Neill

In the summer of 2002, after I had written an article in Esquire that the White House didn’t like about Bush’s former communications director, Karen Hughes, I had a meeting with a senior adviser to Bush. He expressed the White House’s displeasure, and then he told me something that at the time I didn’t fully comprehend – but which I now believe gets to the very heart of the Bush presidency.

“The aide said that guys like me were ‘in what we call the reality-based community,’ which he defined as people who ‘believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality.’

I nodded and murmured something about enlightenment principles and empiricism.

He cut me off. ‘That’s not the way the world really works anymore,’ he continued. ‘We’re an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you’re studying that reality – judiciously, as you will – we’ll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that’s how things will sort out.

We’re history’s actors . . . and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do.’”

Pride, arrogance, despising standards, discussion, rule of law. Complete indifference to impact on others. Empire. Monarchy. Dictatorship — the Divine Right of Kings.

It makes utterly no sense to attempt to dialogue with that. It’s possible that the reason there is so much violence, abuse, death & bloodshed, and complete degradation and corruption around — at least when it comes to certain circles, and trickling down throughout society (as well as percolating up from the so-called “bottom” of society) — is from this arrogant, abusive, and disdainful disregard for others. I still believe that’s a spiritual problem, and a very religious spirit. At times I do hope for a day when that kind of “bad attitude” actually has to kneel down and beg for mercy it didn’t have for others when they begged for it. Other generations also were crying out for this (see the Messiah hunger). Psalm 2, Philippians. etc. Most people just want a little righteousness, enough to live decently on. They’re not about to get it, not from this flock of birds, and not under this tree.

Written by Let's Get Honest|She Looks It Up

November 20, 2012 at 5:08 pm

2 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. Recent Tweet: Annie E. Casey Foundation is soliciting good boys and girls with systems-change experience to help with the warm and fuzzy occupation of “Children and Families.” Sooner or later, a transformation in social understanding had better take place (people have had the contents of that bird stuffed down their throats so long, they can’t think straight).

    LOOK — just because something has “Families and Children” or “Children and Families” (or one, or the other) on the label, doesn’t mean it’s good for either one, or both of them together. In fact, it probably signifies the opposite!

    And now Annie E. Casey Foundation — queen of the foster care field — has added another “F” to their vocabulary: “Fellowship.” Here’s the solicitation:

    If I get the next post up right, I’ll show about how this played out in washington, Wisconsin and WDC about 10 years ago.

    You know what? I lived for many years at the same street address as a man who called himself my husband. This talk of “family” and “us” was constantly thrown in my face as an excuse for: assaults, physical injuries, work sabotage, shut-down of credit, restricting my access to necessary funds to even live on at times, and care for our kids (i.e., better we should all do without than I have any initiative) and this was accepted among those we “fellowshipped” with. The flock of the co-dependent witnesses of family violence.

    If things were really that favorable to children and families, then why are so many millions being spent on the “spin”??

    These are, in reality, about systems change first and foremost. From Tavistock to TANF. It’s about dismantling individual rights, and as such, it’s dangerous. Completely contrary to the spirit of this country and the preamble to the Declaration of Independence. . . . .

    Don’t drink this Kool-aid or take these bribes:

    2013-2014 Annie E. Casey Foundation Children and Family Fellowship

    The 2013-2014 Children and Family Fellowship is designed for outstanding executives with senior leadership responsibilities in large public sector service systems, major community-based service organizations or advocacy initiatives aimed at improving outcomes for children, families and communities.

    The Fellowship is an opportunity for these leaders to accelerate their impact, augment their knowledge and experiences, sharpen their skills, broaden their perspectives and increase their influence.

    For this prestigious opportunity, we look for individuals who:

    Are currently in a leadership role and making a measurable difference for children and families;
    {{Differences have to be measured…Measurement justifies more allocations, etc.}}

    Have taken an innovative idea to scale;
    Have demonstrated their ability to transform systems that serve children and families;
    Have led effective collaborations among families, communities and nonprofit and public agencies;
    Have applied new ideas, tools and approaches that have benefited their work and organizations;
    Have a contribution to make to a network of peers working on the cutting edge of children and family policy and reform; and
    Have the potential to become significantly more influential in their field.

    The selection process for the 2013-2014 Fellowship Class is now underway. See our newest brochure and nomination form to begin the application process.

    If you have questions about the Annie E. Casey Foundation and the Fellowship program, please contact Barbara Squires, director of Leadership Development, at (800) 222-1099, extension 2938.

    before doing this, start going through the 990s to this foundation, or particularly any statement of what they are investing their wealth into; I”m talking which corporations. The word “Carlyle” should ring a bell, but that’s as I recall it I blogged this as a topic on Scranton Political Times earlier this year (or 2011). It may have been under National topics. It also may have been removed….

    Let's Get Honest (FamCourt)

    November 20, 2012 at 7:44 pm

  2. […] https://familycourtmatters.wordpress.com/2012/11/20/government-same-turkey-outside-but-who-changed-th… (use the scrollbar, it’s not only specific to family courts…) Lime-green inset table near the top (C.A. Fitts) and the very last quote at the bottom, summarize “what time of day it is.”  IN between another person writes about how gov’t control is being transferred to private hands (by nonprofit associations).  To understand government, understand those associations (AFCC, ABA, APA, etc.) and their private, philanthropic funders.  These conference together setting policy for federal funds, and keeping the states dependent on the feds for their own economies…. For example, this last week in San Francisco (http://fathersandfamiliescoalition.org, see conf. page bottom right.  Where HHS & OCSE meet fatherhood affiliates, trawling for grants, etc.) Jeffrey Leving supports, David L. Levy spoke at this one… 70pp brochure, faculty from all over the country (and some international). […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: