A Reform Party national meeting in Dallas is scheduled to be held, commencing on Friday afternoon (July 18). The meeting was called to resolve the difficult issue of the identity of the national officers of the Reform Party. In early 2007, a federal jury trial in Florida had determined that the Tampa 2005 national convention of the Reform Party had not been valid. In late 2007, a state court in Texas had determined that the national convention before that one (in Yuma in early 2005) had also not been valid. The Texas court had appointed a professional parliamentarian to preside over a new national meeting.
One of the factions that does not wish to participate in the Texas meeting filed a lawsuit in state court in New York in response to the action of the Texas court. On May 28, the New York court set a hearing on whether the Texas meeting should be enjoined. On July 14, one of the plaintiffs in the New York case telephoned the hotel that is hosting the Dallas meeting, and explained that the hotel should cancel the Dallas meeting. On July 15, the Texas court held a hearing, at which the hotel manager participated. The hotel then determined that it would continue to host the meeting. On July 17, the New York court issued an order saying the plaintiffs in the New York case “will be irretrievably harmed if the defendants are permitted, in effect, to hijack the political parties and entities which appear, on these papers at least, to be in the legitimate domain of the plaintiffs.” However, as of Friday morning, it appears likely that the Dallas meeting will proceed on schedule.
how many ballot lines does the Reform Party still have?
Florida, Mississippi, Louisiana, and Kansas. The first three states have very easy ballot access for president, so those 3 lines aren’t especially valuable. The Kansas Reform Party is no longer affiliated with any national faction anyway and is running Chuck Baldwin for president.
Hmmmmmm. It is my understanding that
[a] The Texas procedures take presendence as they were filed first and had a court appointed conservator, one Ms Crews.
[b] the sneaky, stealth Independence movement, as personified by New York’s Frank MacKay, ILLEGALLY, UNLAWFULLY, AND IMMORALLY failed to mention the previous [and OVER RIDING] action, and failed to mention that Ms Crews is not a reform movement activist but a court appointed monitor.
[c] not only has the New York misapplication expired, and been formally dismissed, but disbarment style procedures are hinted at for the New York attorney.
[d] Political, professional, I wish I’d gone to law school, Liar John Blare has been directly and personally admonished to not disrupt the DFW ‘convention’.
FROM JOHN BLARE/ FRANK MACKAY PUPPET AND ONE MAN POLITICAL STATE PARTY KEN JONES:
KJones6105@aol.com
Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2008 12:36:56 EDT
Subject:
[ReformNewsList] CREWS and her agents DILEMMA
It appears that Kay Allison Crews and her agents will not escape the jurisdiction of the NY Supreme Court because of Long Arm statutes.
“long-arm stat·ute (plural long-arm stat·utes)
noun
Definition:
law permitting interstate jurisdiction: a provision in law that allows a state to exercise jurisdiction over somebody living in another state
Over the years, the reach of personal jurisdiction has been expanded by judicial interpretations and legislative enactments. In the landmark 1945 case International Shoe Co. v. Washington, the United States Supreme Court greatly expanded the constitutional boundaries of personal jurisdiction, well beyond its traditional physical presence basis. Following International Shoe, states in the United States enacted so-called long-arm statutes, by which courts in a state can exercise jurisdiction over a party located outside the state, if the party has sufficient contacts within the state
Personal jurisdiction problems are acute in cases involving business transactions conducted across state lines, where the defendant may not have set foot in the other state, but still conducted affairs with the other state’s residents through correspondence, the shipment of goods, or indirect agents.
Personal jurisdiction based on state long-arm statutes–that is, jurisdiction not based on presence within the state–is divided, for constitutional analysis purposes, into two categories: general and specific jurisdiction. General jurisdiction exists when an out-of-state party has extensive, systematic and continuous dealings with the state in which the court sits. When a court has general jurisdiction over a party, the court has personal jurisdiction over any dispute involving the party. Thus, a court’s general jurisdiction power is equivalent to its power based on presence within the state
a court’s specific jurisdiction power over a party, when the party does not have systematic and continuous contacts with the state, is specific to cases that have a substantial connection to the party’s in-state activity.”
LAKE’S LOGIC LESSON:
If this dictum applies to human beings.
AND if humans have two arms
THERE FORE it would not be unreasonable that this influence would WORK BOTH WAYS [ie: Texas to NY]
The first run movie, ‘Stepford Wives’ takes place in Conneticut. If they ever did a Ken Jones flick [Stepford Activist?] would it also take place in the tri state area?
This all rather interesting. Let us all engage in a little barister suppostion.
There was a ongoing legal case in a Court in Texas. As some point Messer MacKay and his Brownshirts declared that he is the PooBahh of the Reform Party, this after he provided a little green axel greese in the pockets of former Reform Party officials, in addition to being the Fuhrer of the Ny Your State Independence Party, where he has a record of purging minorities, and the National Independence Party of America, which is a fraud, let us avoid the the logical qiestion of being Chairman of 2 separate National Political Parties for the time being.
In any event, there was a ongoing legal case in Texas. If His Highness MacKay was indeed the Chairman of the Reform Party, why did he not enter an appearance in the legal case that had already been in progress and that does indeed take priority under the legal pribcipal of First Filed?
I would dare mention that there are questions of financial transactions that he has engaged in that he would not want to answer.
It matters not what Messer MacKay has filed in NY. The Reform Party had previoulsy been placed under Court Order, Under a Court Injunction, and in Receivership. Therefore he has no claim to any position in that Reform Party as there could have been no legal action to place him in that position.
Now, would anyone care to answer how anyone can be Chairman of two different National Political Parties and avoid any semblence of a conflict of interest? AND would the minions d who carry Messer MacKay’s water care to disclose the amount of remuneration they have received since their involvement with this man MacKay who has very dubious background and ethics?
The Convention in Dallas is indeed Legal and in progress. I have been in this convention and left this evening after Blair sent one of his raving lunatics in that was escorted off of the premesis. The Party is still fractured as the voting on principles has deteriorated to madness invoked by Beverly Kennedy. Ted Weil wants the all Powerful Presidential Nomination and it looks as if Florida (which is the only organized state that runs candidates) is going to disaffiliate from the National Party, thus only leaving them with 3 States. What a Disaster…
Talk about a muddled mess. Has ears been sighted lately ?
Are any of these factions the same ones that nominated Nader in 04?
Speaking of Nader, much of this started in P2004 when John Bircher and Ohio State Chair Virginia ‘New Frontier Coalition’ Brooks had a hand in both the print news letter and the national convention. Both were drawn out to the point of sticking the wooden shoe [the Dutch ‘Sabot’] in to the machinery. The very Churchie Our Miss Brooks, along with deceased ’40 Decibel’ Uncle Sam Top Hat Ted Webster of Iowa, had not one good thing to say about Uncle Ralph between them!
Round two also went to the [yet an other band of] Religious Obstructionists. John [Israel can do no wrong] Blare, lying Christian Fundamentalist John Bambey, and John ‘Lurking In the Shadows’ Coffey, founder of Citizens For A Better Veterans Home in 1998, killed the before mentioned house organ AND the national internet blog in order to clobber a public position on dead non combatants of the USS Liberty via the Israeli ‘Defense’ Forces.
[And Patriot Steven wonders why I fought off these kkkreeps from contaminating ‘We The People’! Told Ya So!]
If the [Perot 20% in P1992] reform movement does not serve a use ful purpose, it deserves to whither and die!
I have been pushing for the 1776 Montrou Flag, the three bladed electricity generating wind mill [as a 21st Century Peace Sign], Teddy Roosevelt and the Bull Moose as Party icons. Will the 2008 DFW ‘convention’ suggest that the ‘Circular Firing Squad’ is more applicable?
It turns out that it was John Bambey that was thrown out after trying to intimidate Kay Crews with a Law Suit that was invalid as usual. Texas stated they didn’t want Florida affiliated anymore and Florida pointed out that it is the only State that is truely organized and runs candidates. Texas is a mess, Louisiana is a mess and Mississippi is a mess. Tedd Weil brought in an entire crew of his employees that were credentialed as there were no rules to stop him so they could give him the Presidential nomination. Florida submitted a letter that they had fulfilled their requirement under the judges orders and left the Convention early. Once Ted Weil’s employees left, it doesn’t look like there will be enough to have a quarum and keep the convention going. The convention went south due to 2 people. Bev Kennedy and Ted Weil, thus proving that the Reform Party at a National level is unsalvagable. Florida would do well on it’s own and should seek fusion in it’s state to merge with another party. It looks like this will happen and the rest of the states at the convention will remain in chaos. Kay Crews looks like she is ready to drink an entire keg by herself as they have basically driven her crazy with line item changes to their principles and platforms ( courtesy of Bev Kennedy ).
God bless, Kay Crews!
When I was the ‘publisher’ of the party’s national print news letter, via being the National Chair of the Communications Committee [as a favor to California John Blare] obstructionists/ Texans Beverly Kennedy and Sandra Madison made 56 points of order and or points of information in two hours of a 36 person teleconference.
Bambey had a ‘Anti Abortion, Bible Thumper’ reputation as early as five years ago. John Blare and John Coffey, fellow travelers in the Reform Party of California Israeli Mafia, kept on defending him. ‘He is just passionate, he’s OK!’
Bambey told me on a number of occasions that he would not inject religion into party planks. I have copies of his explicit recent declaration that his christain principles led him to the reform party!
Can anyone please inform us as to the final results and outcomes of the Reform Convention held in Dallas Texas??
What was adopted? Were there elections? Will these matters be presented to the Judge presiding in the Case for any form of certification?
Bambey was videoed looking like a complete idiot, calling for the convention to end and was escorted off of the premisis by Dallas Police. The end has come for Blare and Bambey. It is official, the Leadership is in place for the National Reform Party. Although Beverly Kennedy and Sandra Madison ran Florida off. Florida is key to the Reform Party as they are the only organized state with Ballot access out of the 4 left, now there are only 3. The delegates from Florida have more class in their pinkies than Sandra and Beverly have in their entire bodies. I know who Don is as he has written to me many times and now, even though the National Reform Party is legitimate, they have run everyone off, except for the Nuts, Flakes, and Granolas. This includes you Don, ( sorry if the truth hurts ). Strong states will continue to organize, but as for the National Reform Party, it is DEAD!!! The 400,000.00 owed to the FEC makes it impossible to ever raise money to give to candidates, thanks to Pat Buchanan and the Buchananites. States that organize will nost likely fuse with other parties or come up with a new party all together. The judge will have minutes and a video of the entire convention and will no doubt certify it is legitimate. The only States Representated were Nebraska, Oregon, Florida, Mississippi, Louisianna, Texas, Pennsylvania, and New Jersey. As I said earlier, the Florida delegation left after it was clear that there was not going to be any progress as Long as Beverly Kennedy had someone to argue with. Beverly is jealous that Florida works, runs candidates , and has ballot access and Texas doesn’t. If the National Reform Party can ever get rid of Beverly Kennedy, it might stand a chance but it is going to be without Florida as begging would not bring them back.
So, who is the chairman of the National Reform Party anyways?
TheTrueReformist:
Nothing to be sorry about! If that is the way you feel, fine. I appreciate you being honest about it. I have never caught Ruben Hernandez, Ted Weill, Jack Krestler [Yuma], JoAnn Murphy, or Paul Wittkamm in a direct lie.
I have never caught Shawn O’Hara in a direct lie, but the farther I get away from 2005 the shadier he looks. I do not pretend to guess your actual identity, but pretty much every one else has been caught in a direct false hood. Direct, first hand, blatant, ‘two plus two is five’ fabrication.
Shawn O’Hara’s conduct in the Hattiesburg [Mississippi] mayor’s race is suspect. His conduct in the 2005 Yuma [Arizona] National ‘convention’ is suspect to the point of being at least immoral. [Not bad for a ‘preacher man’! I guess Jesse Jackson needed some company!]
Maybe we can chauk up me eradic, ecceneric, looney, ‘Nuts, Flakes, and Granolas’ behavior to stress. With John Coffey’s shadowy mind games and the battle ground of the teleconferences, in 2005 I began bleeding out of the nose during same. I finally got in office surgery. [On my nose, not my brain!]
Even tho I do not know who you are [I am in the local phone book] could you plz tell me upon one occasion which I have been caught in a lie! If I am completely crazy, but basically truthful, that sure puts me ahead, way ahead, of John Blare, John Bambey, John Coffey, and Valli Sharpe Geisler.
One incident. One quote. One action. One written article. 619.420.0209 any time…..
Don, I will be calling you when I get home. I am leaving Dallas today. The National Reform Party Chairman is David Collison ( I think I spelled that right ), but the problem is that Beverly Kennedy is Treasurer. Ted Weil is the Presidential Nominee ( surprise, surprise…) This entire convention has been a joke, but legitimate..
Taken from the last section of the RPUSA-Action Group Newsletter, dated today, 20 July 2008:
TWO BOGUS GROUPS CLAIM “LEADERSHIP†OF RPUSA!
A year ago, the USDC, Tallahassee, N.D. Florida, declared there were only two legitimate “factions†of the RPUSA: those State Party Organizations (SPO’s) still under the 2003 RPUSA Constitution; and those SPO’s that formally adopted the 2004 Charter & Bylaws and reconstituted the Reform Party National Committee ! Then claiming to come out of the 2003 RPUSA Constitution faction, a splinter-group known as the “Dallas-faction-Bag-Ladiesâ€, aka, “Kennedy-factionâ€, resurfaced and they were almost immediately opposed by the “MacKay/Blare-faction†of New York! The factual irony is that neither group is a legitimate SPO of the RPUSA! MacKay is the ersatz chairman of the Independence Party of New York (IPNY) and they officially disaffiliated from the RPUSA in SEP 2000; while the so-called “Texas Reform Party / Reform Party of Texas†officially dissolved in April 2002!
The “Kennedy-faction†sued the national officers of the RPUSA in a district of the Dallas County Court, using a lawyer; two (Rodney Martin & John Blare) of the four national officers of the RPUSA responded in part, but rather than finish the fight on legal grounds afforded to them, decided to capitulate and appease their opponents by agreeing to a meeting using a court-appointed “parliamentarian†– after the “Kennedy-faction†was required to post a $25K Bond to pay the parliamentarian! Meanwhile Blare joined with the “MacKay-faction†who also resurfaced making false claims to still being an RPUSA affiliate! So rather than be outdone by the “Kennedy-factionâ€, the “MacKay-faction†filed a TRO on 28 May 2008 to prevent any meetings to take place without their approval; and then a permanent injunction was filed with the State Supreme Court of New York, on 17 July 2008, a day before the Martin-Kennedy meeting was to take place in Dallas County! The comedy of these actions is that any claimed results of the Dallas meeting is ONLY APPLICABLE in Dallas County – and the so-called injunction out of New York is only applicable in New York!
Meanwhile both BOGUS groups are threatening each other and everyone else with the alleged “long-arm-statutes†of their respective states – but those alleged statutes are meaningless with the multiple changes and applications that have occurred in court case law through recent years! Thus both groups are simply “blowing-in-the-wind†with their bravado – like a little dog, all bark and no bite since neither group has any legal standing when the time comes to challenge! But this has been typical of these ole-Perotista-groups that think they can “RULE to RUIN†the RPUSA! They have yet to realize that a NEW DAY HAS DAWNED IN THE RPUSA!
For a summary analysis of these events, see , “ANOTHER BOGUS CONVENTION WITH ‘KENNEDY-GROUP’ AS THE HOST!â€, prepared by Skip Foley, National Chairman / Reform Party National Committee, reconstituted under the 2004 Charter & Bylaws. Also included is an ‘Open Letter’ to all legitimately established SPO’s to formally adopt the 2004 Charter & Bylaws and reunite the RPUSA with only legitimate SPO’s! This time there will be TRUTH in UNITY! Only legitimate state party organizations need apply!
Not true Jerry. Unfortunate as it may seem, the Texas Order is recognized Nationally as this judge made sure to put an end to this once and for all. John Bambey, Blare and even yourself were all notified and could have credentialled here in Texas. The only valid Reform Party Nationally is going to be recognized from this convention. Organized States can disaffiliate and move to another National Party outside of the Reform name if they so choose.
“If the [Perot 20% in P1992] reform movement does not serve a use ful purpose, it deserves to whither and die!” – Recent post
Westcott responds:
The Reform Party USA is neither withering nor dying. In fact, the Reform Party USA is alive and functioning very well as a result of a combination of reorganization, sensible restructuring, healthy alliances. and determined and competent leadership. (The United States’ government please take note.)
What the RPUSA has shed, by way of legal judgmental decisions, is the repugnant selfishness and vindictive subjectiveness of a few disgustingly abhorrent disruptive individuals.
I knew some of these individuals, although I do not proudly admit to being briefly influenced by accepting their witches brew concoction of lies and deception, laced by their despicable egocentricity and intentionally devious fragmentation procedures. One cannot avoid conjuring the image of a “mirror, mirror on the wall” analogy for comparative analysis to what these people have attempted to do to the Reform Party USA in order to temporarily satisfy their nymphomania for self-deceptive, fleetingly-satisfying political power. Only in unsound minds can there be found historically equivalent political operations and methodology. And only in the Congress of the United States can there be found a comparative formula for loathsome personal influence and advancement.
Never once in my experience with these individuals was the subject of national importance even discussed regarding the issues that continue to demolish our nation. Not once! Bickering was, and continues to be, their repetitive theme. Disgraceful. Revolting. And most certainly, as proved to date, unsuccessful.
Please heed my plea, fellow reformers, fellow patriots, fellow American taxpayers, my fellow Americans: Mend this divisiveness. Cast the lot of disruption aside. Join with us in (re)building a truly necessary formidable American political organization. One that focuses on the essentialness of correcting the wrongful course our nation is embarked upon. Disregard and discard the unprincipled and nonproductive insanity that threatens to further erode the valiant and admirable, and necessary original purpose for creating the Reform Party. We must question and resist the ulterior motives of the cabal of a few. This is not all about individuality. We do not need any more disgusting politicians and their paid-for minions to disrupt our worthy mission. We need unity. We need statesmanship. We need leadership. After all, the very future of our nation is at stake.
Very truly yours,
Bruce Westcott
“Do You Want The Truth?”
To claim there are only three RPUSA SPO left is simply not true! CA, PA, KS, NV and RI come to mind as recognized by their SOS. The majority of these are affiliated with the RPUSA under the leadership of Frank Mackay in addition to a number of others!
Service Mark rights were granted to the RPUSA officers elected in Yuma AZ and their successors by the litigation that took place in Tallahassee FL. Once service mark rights are granted they cannot be legitimately claimed by others.
Any meetings called by anyone other than these officers and their successors of these elected officers are invalid. The Name, Logo, Web Site and phone number GoReform are protected Service Marks of the RPUSA Frank Mackay Chairman. 🙂
Ken Jones
To “TheTrueReformist”…
First: No county court judge can make a ruling that has any force or effect in all States in regards to a national political party or sovereign SPO’s — so kindly check the jurisdiction of the 193rd Dallas County District Court — it begins and ends within its county boundaries! A national political party is comprised of LEGITIMATE state party organizations (SPO’s)that must all be in compliance with their respective state & federal regulations THAT GOVERN POLITICAL PARTIES! Have you ever read the 1998 FEC-AO issued to the RPUSA on 6 March 1998? If not, I suggest everyone do so ASAP and THEN they will surely see that the RPUSA can NO LONGER qualify — AND that the only reason the RPUSA is still listed is because it owes a DEBT to the FEC / U.S. Treasury!
Since the Dallas County Court case was presented by Attorney Matt Sawyer, and Rodney Martin & John Blare were Pro Se, the judge simply put in play a new meeting between these two factions since the Federal Jury in Tallahassee declared 2005 Tampa invalid; and Martin claimed in the Dallas case that 2005 Yuma invalid! Thus the results are only applicable to the 2003 RPUSA Constitution faction — no one else!
This is only a scratch on the surface — there are a host of other reasons why this recent meeting WILL NOT HOLD UP in a real court of law when the time comes! As those of us have been repeating for the last several years, EACH SPO on its own can decide with whom to affiliate, and when it comes to the RPUSA — only those under the 2004 CHARTER & BYLAWS have a legal line of continuity — since only legitimate SPO’s can affiliate!
SECOND, what Bruce Westcott, Chairman of Nevada Reform Party has stated is correct — neither the “Dallas-faction” nor the “MacKay-faction” have ever stood for anything FOR AMERICA — they have only made claims for THEMSELVES! Since day one, they have only tried to “Rule or Ruin” — which amounts to “Rule to Ruin” — they stand for nothing in the context of American Minor Party politics!
THIRD, everyone should know that there was NO DECISION regarding anything to do with trademarks, logos, phone numbers, websites, or anything else along those lines via the Tallahassee Case last year! The “Kennedy-faction” surely tried to impose such interpretations — but the SIMPLE FACT IS THAT POLITICAL PARTIES HAVE NO TRADEMARKS — all their names are GENERIC! Besides when it came to the Tallahassee Trial, discussion of those matters would have been in the Third Phase if it had gone that far! The simple fact remains that political parties do not file trademarks since political parties cannot own anything of any “commercial value”!
It sure would be nice AND INTELLIGENT if folks wanting to play politics first learned the REGULATIONS THAT GOVERN POLITICAL PARTIES, CANDIDATES & CAMPAIGNS — before thinking that RRoO or some “parliamentarian” knew what they were doing! Kennedy’s self-styled claims to being a “parliamentarian” have never meant anything to the RPUSA — and now we see that neither do those of a so-called “professional parliamentarian” in the likes of Kay Allison Crews mean anything even if ordered to conduct a meeting in Dallas County! Rules we don’t need no stinking rules — unless they are “my rules” as Kennedy is known to claim! No, IT’S THE LAWS “STUPID” that regulate political parties — not social club rules! And it’s legitimate sovereign SPO’s that establish national political parties in compliance with FEC Regulations — not county judges from Dallas!
I guess it’s my turn.
First, Post #19, From the True Reformist
[Not true Jerry. Unfortunate as it may seem, the Texas Order is recognized Nationally as this judge made sure to put an end to this once and for all. John Bambey, Blare and even yourself were all notified and could have credentialled here in Texas. The only valid Reform Party Nationally is going to be recognized from this convention. Organized States can disaffiliate and move to another National Party outside of the Reform name if they so choose.]
Notification: True Reformist, you are aware that the rules of this Dallas convention were/are based on the 2003 constitution? What was the accepted method of contact? The 2003 convention was under the 2002 rules that were either existing, amended or added to the constitution by the convention, right? It means anything changed in 2002 would be the applicable rules for the 2003 convention and that would also mean anything passed in the 2003 convention would be applicable to the 2004 convention. It also means that the convention, when passing rules are passing rules for the future and not for the current convention. The rules do not apply until the said current convention is over and the “new year” if you prefer starts which would be the time after the convention is declared done.
So, back to the notification. E-mail? E-mail was never an acceptable form of official communications up to and including the 2002 convention. The rules, if the change can be documented somewhere, didn’t accept emails until after the 2003 convention, so if that is correct, the rules of contacting a state or the officers of a state was not followed through correctly and hence, no official notification was given. Official notification would be certified mail by the USPS or other recognized delivery agent such as UPS, DHL or FEDEX. Didn’t happen so doesn’t count. Why? Easy! What if I claimed that I didn’t get it (which by the way, Maine didn’t)? IF it was emailed, and I have been having problems with my email being unreliable, how would anyone know if I did get it? There is no proof. Anything to the contrary is hearsay. Maine did not get properly notified.
Again, follow the rules: The states must be notified of the National Convention by the National Convention Committee 30 days prior to the convention with an adgenda of what will be on the floor in order to allow the states time to talk amoungst their own members and possibly talk to other state party organizations to develop a common ground and through that determine how they may vote. I didn’t see an agenda so I can’t really comment on what was enclosed in it but I’m getting it wasn’t more than the equivilent of a wedding invitation.
The only items to be voted upon would be those in the agenda sent out 30 days before and why is that? So that the meeting doesn’t get stacked at the last minute and new unrelated or “surprise” motions aren’t introduced for anything other than discussion. It is unfair to have the ambush legislation. It happens in Congress all the time and we never liked it there either cause we don’t even know what it is until after the fact. That’s why it was there in the first place.
Does anyone have a 2002 constitution? That is the one that would pertain to the 2003 convention.
As to the whole world paying attention to the Dallas County court case, let’s get a little real. There aren’t very many states that have the same laws, written the same ways or mean exactly the same things, are there? NO there aren’t. Dallas is a county. It has no effect on it’s decision in New Jersey, California or anywhere else other than in Dallas. There is no force and effect except in Dallas. So, somewhere down the road someone gets sued in Dallas by the bag-ladies because they didn’t play with the bag-ladies and they are found guiltly? The only effect is if the party being sued happens to wonder into the Dallas area. Then, if anyone knew or cared, they might get tagged. Other than that, no force or effect in any other state. Same with small claims court. Only in that state and no other. To go to another state would be cost prohibative so unless its a big thing, no one would bother.
# 20, Bruce Wescott – I agree with you. In the past few years the RP has lowered itself to talking about people (which is a battle never to be won) rather than about “things” or “ideas”. Plattatudes are about all that can be expected and plattatudes are not going to protect us citizens from the government if it decides to tread on us.
#21 Ken Jones : There are a couple of varients on legitimacy that wasn’t really well defined in the post Jerry posted. This is probably because the post was an excerp from an upcoming article. What is more accurate is the legitimate state party orgainizations include two areas which include some of what you,Ken mentioned.
First, there are the legitimate party organization who have ballot access. By default, if they have ballot access, running through the hoops of their home state, then…. they are legitimate. The law varies from state to state. Some are close to impossible and others are really easy.
Second, there are those who have a legitimate line of continuity from whenever they left the party or as in some cases the National kicked them out, the laws of the states are such that they can run as a party, do their filing, not have ballot access but are still recognized by their state SOS as what they are and who they are.
The third are those states who never file, never have minutes made public, never do anything other than declare they are the real thing. Those won’t nor can they ever be counted as anything more than observers. The ways are there, the methods are there and the possibilities are certainly there but these people for whatever reason have ignored that which should not be ignored.
There are some federal law descrepancies in this current meeting that those people call a convention. I’m betting they are all in violation but I’ll certainly bet I know at least a dozen who are at this point in time. They ignored Federal Law as did the Judge as did the parlimentarian and as such, they can either admit there was no convention or admit there was and be found guilty of violating federal law. It is quite a box they put themselves into.
So, now what do we do. Every one is fluttering around in a circle pretending to be the vultures looking at a Reform party meal real soon. There has not been any leadership in this party in a long time and the frustration of this is evident in just what is currently happening. The consistancy of leadership is a building block and the inconsistancy is the means to tear everything down. So I’ve got an idea that might put us back on the map and together.
We have the full list of all the states who can attend a meeting in an official capasity. There are quite a few of them. If we had a meeting in Kansas City like we had in 2002 or if it were further west or further east, whereever the best rates might take us for both room and tickets, it would probably be a productive meeting of the minds in order to determine our future direction. I’m betting 20 to maybe 40 of the brighter minds might enjoy a little real intellectual fulfillment instead of the garbage being flung out across the country as we currently have.
An agenda might be in order to which we have a few items to talk about, a few items to decide and few items yet to be determined.
After the meeting, unlike the current regemes, each representative instead of having something shoved down his/her respective throats, would instead be required to bright it back to their state organization and discuss it, take it apart and put it back together. Then, after the state has digested it, the state can inteligently say yea or nea. No surprises, no sneaky underhandedness and no lack of transparency. It would be refreshing and most likely welcome.
I know I’d like a break from stupidity. The Feds are planning on taking over our currency in toto even though they are a non-profit organization but nothing is said on that. Nor is any thing been said on the war, the price of oil, alternative energy ideas, the economice stimulas package disguised and a fundraiser for the Credit Card industry, the $4.00 tomato and more. Where are we these items? No where. We are shattered and alone fighting the dragon that really doesn’t exist. It’s not what we need
Just think about it. Call lake and run it by him. He would probably welcome the change as would I.
Also, remember the last two times I posted on Ballot Access, the whole post was taken down so hope you save this when you get it.
Skip
Maine
Too much talk and not enough clarity!
For those that can remember, at 2002 Denver, Bev Kennedy tried to stop the meeting from taking place by filing a lawsuit in the USDC, Denver, by suing all the members of the 2002 RPUSA Credentialing Committee. Her reasons were that Texas could not comply with the applicable standards that all the other SPO’s were required to follow for the seating of their Delegations. The Federal Judge dismissed the case the same day it was filed for lack of jurisdiction since no Federal Funds or matters of law were at issue!
Then upon arriving, Texas filed “affidavits” (that later turned out to be false), so Texas was seated provisionally pending verification of their affidavits — within 30 days after the meeting! So on the convention floor, Bev Kennedy pulled from her “brown-paper-bag” (hence nickname, “Bag Ladies”), her new “rules” to replace the 2002 RPUSA Constitution! She was vehemently opposed in an overwhelming vote of those present, and those at 2002 Denver voted to return to the 1999 RPUSA Constitution instead of debating over any “rule changes”! All proposed rule changes were tabled and recommended for review by a new Rules Committee.
The vote to revert to the 1999 Constitution version, and table all proposed changes, was taken late Saturday afternoon since all Friday night, all Saturday morning, and for half of Saturday afternoon, the debate on the floor kept reverting to the same arguments over the legitimacy of “delegates” from primarily Connecticut and Illinois, and some others who showed up, but had no legal line of continuity!
Therefore, in Skip’s scenario, the 2003 RPUSA Constitution, allegedly passed at 2003 Gulf Port, started out as the 2002 RPUSA Constitution, that reverted to the 1999 RPUSA Constitution via the vote at 2002 Denver! And since the 2003 Constitution did not make anything better, only more convoluted, a handful of legitimate SPO’s formally adopted the CHARTER & BYLAWS on 04 April 2004, via the “Resolution for Substitution” — hence the 2004 CHARTER & BYLAWS found at . The Charter & Bylaws are in full compliance with all State & Federal Regulations governing political parties — and puts the RPUSA on a level playing field with Real Political Parties — instead of being just a PAC as do the various versions of the RPUSA “Constitutions”! This difference was clearly recognized by the USDC, Tallahassee, N.D. Florida, in the Final Order & Judgment last July 2007! It remains so now and until the RPUSA is reunited with only legitimate SPO’s!
For those that can remember, at 2002 Denver, Bev Kennedy tried to stop the meeting from taking place by filing a lawsuit in the USDC, Denver, by suing all the members of the 2002 RPUSA Credentialing Committee. Her reasons were that Texas could not comply with the applicable standards that all the other SPO’s were required to follow for the seating of their Delegations. The Federal Judge dismissed the case the same day it was filed for lack of jurisdiction since no Federal Funds or matters of law were at issue!
Then upon arriving, Texas filed “affidavits” (that later turned out to be false), so Texas was seated provisionally pending verification of their affidavits — within 30 days after the meeting! So on the convention floor, Bev Kennedy pulled from her “brown-paper-bag” (hence nickname, “Bag Ladies”), her new “rules” to replace the 2002 RPUSA Constitution! She was vehemently opposed in an overwhelming vote of those present, and those at 2002 Denver voted to return to the 1999 RPUSA Constitution instead of debating over any “rule changes”! All proposed rule changes were tabled and recommended for review by a new Rules Committee.
The vote to revert to the 1999 Constitution version, and table all proposed changes, was taken late Saturday afternoon since all Friday night, all Saturday morning, and for half of Saturday afternoon, the debate on the floor kept reverting to the same arguments over the legitimacy of “delegates” from primarily Connecticut and Illinois, and some others who showed up, but had no legal line of continuity!
Therefore, in Skip’s scenario, the 2003 RPUSA Constitution, allegedly passed at 2003 Gulf Port, started out as the 2002 RPUSA Constitution, that reverted to the 1999 RPUSA Constitution via the vote at 2002 Denver! And since the 2003 Constitution did not make anything better, only more convoluted, a handful of legitimate SPO’s formally adopted the CHARTER & BYLAWS on 04 April 2004, via the “Resolution for Substitution” — hence the 2004 CHARTER & BYLAWS found at http://www.rpnc.org . The Charter & Bylaws are in full compliance with all State & Federal Regulations governing political parties — and puts the RPUSA on a level playing field with Real Political Parties — instead of being just a PAC as do the various versions of the RPUSA “Constitutions”! This difference was clearly recognized by the USDC, Tallahassee, N.D. Florida, in the Final Order & Judgment last July 2007! It remains so now and until the RPUSA is reunited with only legitimate SPO’s!
Phil,
What type of clarity would you like?
Skip
Maine
Please forgive my lack of patience, Skip. All of this is very interesting actually. It is very sad, though, to see the Reform Party of the United States going through all of this drama and all of these divisions (sad but not all that rare for relatively new political parties).
A few facts to correct some of the misinformaton that has been posted here:
1) The Constitution that governed the convening of the 2008 Reform Party national convention in Dallas was the Constitution adopted “as of” the 2003 convention. It was the 2003 Constitution, not the 2002 version.
2) There is a federal law that requires ALL courts in the nation (federal, state, county, and municipal), to give the “judicial proceedings” of ALL other courts in the nation the same effect as those proceedings have in the state where they were issued. Case law I have found limits the statute to those orders and proceedings that are the result of a judicial determination based on the merits of the case – where both sides of a dispute have presented their side to the court.
Bev
But that’s the very POINT, Bev, “both sides” of the dispute WERE NOT able to present their side to the Dallas County Court! Blare didn’t care anymore, and Martin simply gave up trying over numerous reasons, mostly health issues. So what YOU have now is another hollow victory, a title for yourself, a paper-shell, and one County/State in which to parade around and beat your own drum — again! At this point, no body really cares!
As for the legal issues, you know as well as anyone else that a national political party is comprised of sovereign & legitimate SPO’s! Something the RPUSA has NOT had since losing ballot access after the 2000 elections! When has Texas ever run a candidate under the “Reform Party” label or qualified as a legitimate SPO with ballot access in the name of the “Reform Party”?
The outcome of the Dallas County Court, is the same as that of the New York Supreme Court and the alleged “claims” being made by the “MacKay-faction” — they are just TEMPORARY, to provide a starting point, both Orders contain similar language pertaining to “until the termination of these proceedings”! And let’s face it, neither Texas nor New York has been challenged on their respective “standing” to bring any action outside of their respective state jurisdictions.
Courts do not determine national political parties, only sovereign SPO’s can do that once their application is accepted and passes ALL THE TESTS of their respective State, Federal & FEC Regulations! You do know that those Regulations are outside of RRoO don’t you?
Jerry Heinemann, if you had any actual knowledge, as opposed to the unfounded assumptions you pronounce as fact, you would know that John Blare AND Rodney Martin HAVE presented their side of the dispute to Judge Ginsberg (193rd District Court of Texas in Dallas County).
In early 2008 Rodney Martin found out for himself how badly John Blare had been misleading him and they “split the blanket” so to speak. John Blare asserts his claim of validity at every hearing in the case – but, as Judge Ginsberg told him at the February 22 hearing (when the convention and receiver were ordered) that just because the officers elected at the Yuma convention had been declared invalid that did not mean that the officers elected at the Yuma convention were valid.
The February 22 hearing included testimony from our side and from Blare’s side. Blare’s witness admitted on the stand that not all who were entitled to receive notice of the Yuma convention were sent the notice. 3 witnesses on our side testified that they were entitled to notice (state party chairmen and the SPO’s national committee delegates are “known delegates”) did not receive notice. Based on the testimony – from both sides – obviously Yuma was not valid. As a result, the only way to determine who the legitimate officers are, at this time, was through a new convention to make that determination.
A new convention was ordered. A Receiver was put in place as an agent of the judge (all receivers are agents of the judge appointing them). The Receiver was ordered to make sure the new convention was in compliance with the RPUSA’s Constitution/rules, so the judge will know who the legitimate officers are. As soon as the Receiver submits her report to the court, Judge Ginsberg will know who the legitimate officers are.
And yes, I do know all the federal/FEC laws and regulations. I know them inside-out, and I know how the courts apply them. You can not make that claim with any semblance of validity. I remind you that Judge Hinkle (federal judge) repeatedly said you were wrong when you you kept trying to convince him of your theory of state party validity. You and John Blare are very much alike in steadfastly holding on to your perceptions and what you want to believe even after a court says you are wrong.
Bev
Oops! Correction in the above: “just because the officers elected at the Yuma convention had been declared invalid” — is not correct.
That should be “just because the officers elected at the Tampa convention had been declared invalid”
Bev
Perhaps you have a short memory these days, Bev, but when we proffered all our exhibits into the final trial record at the close of the trial, the Federal Judge indeed DID acknowledge that all of our exhibits were valid and that the VALIDITY OF EACH SPO WOULD BE THE “FIRST THING” CONSIDERED BY THE 11TH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS if the matter were ever appealed!
And perhaps you need to be reminded again about Docs. 378 (Final Order) and 379 (Clerk’s Judgment) regarding the only two legitimate “factions” recognized at the close of the Tallahassee Case (RPUSA v. O’Hara, et al., Case #4:05-cv-426, USDC, Tallahassee, N.D. Florida)!
Finally, When & If you file any financial statements as required as alleged “treasurer”, and When & If the full record of this alleged “convention” becomes public knowledge — we shall all see then just how much of the “federal/FEC laws and regulations” you really do know — and so will the FEC and other interested Federal Agencies!
In the meantime, why don’t you provide everyone a full accounting of the 2000 RPUSA Convention Committee of which you were a member so everyone can see just how much of the FEC Matching Funds were “stolen” by you and your cronies! The actual amount was $358,000+, marked down to $333,558.00, plus interst, right? Isn’t an internal audit exactly what Ohio Attorney Bruce Wick attempted to do, AN INTERNAL AUDIT, that YOU vehemently opposed? Now exactly why was that, Bev? Oh well, the stage is just about set for all of this to finally blow open — don’t ya think?
Jerry, if you would bother to read the FEC’s audit report – instead of making ridiculous claims – you would know the FEC accounted for every cent of the funds.
You would know that nobody “stole” any of those funds. You would also know that the bulk of the $333,558 went to “The Performance Group” as partial payment on a contract to provide all the logistical requirements (decorations, badges, etc.) for the 2000 convention. You might even know that Dale Cooter tried to get the $300,000 back from The Peformance Group by lawsuit, but he lost the case, so The Performance Group got to keep the money.
If you actually knew anything about law, you would know that since federal law requires an audit by the FEC, no outside audit is going to have any impact whatsoever. If you can figure out how to research case law (prior court decisions) you can verify that for yourself – if you can’t, or won’t, you will go on believing an absolute falsehood.
Bev
Geewiz, Bev, another day of having a short memory! Did not the same FEC Final Audit clearly indicate that BOTH Ronn Young AND Gerald Moan, acting as treasurers respectively, COMMINGLED those funds with their private bank accounts? So we ask again, where are those internal audit reports or financial statements as was supposed to be reported periodically to each RPUSA annual meeeting, or the NatCom, or the ExCom, pursuant to the so-called “rules” you claim to live by? Ya can’t have it both ways, Bev – no matter how much ya try!
But that’s Ok for now since the right method to uncover the theft of those funds was for the RPUSA to sue the 2000 RPUSA Convention Committee for a complete expose’ — but since that did not happen, the FEC did it for the RPUSA! NOW it’s up to the criminal investigators to finish the task — so not to worry — the Men in Black may be coming to a neighborhood near you very soon!
Hey Beverly, here’s an easy question or two for you to answer since you always want to be known as a “treasurer” — who paid the Bond of $5,000 for the court and the Bond of $20,000 for the “parliamentarian receiver”, Kay Allison Crews, in order for your faction to hold its meeting according to the county court order?
And second, how much did Ms. Crews actually request as her “fee” for having to tolerate all the shenanigans she had to content just so you could get your version of the “rules” into play — ya know, the same ones you’ve been carrying around in your brown-paper-bag since 2002 Denver that were rejected by the Tallahassee Jury Verdict?
Will there be any TRANSPARENCY this time around?
So if Ole Bev, with the death bed smile, ever starts an accounting firm or a parliamentary consulting business, the corporate logo will be a window pane? [Nope, probably a rapidly spinning weather vane!]
The call to the Dallas meeting is defective in that the call was not made by the Chairman of the RPUSA nor was he asked to make the call.
The call to a Convention in Dallas Texas on July 18, 2008 issued by Kay Crews is also defective in not clarifying who could participate.
Could a group of voters from another party be credentialed for the Dallas meeting and potentially take over the party or would they be required to be registered as a Reform Party member in a SPO that qualified to participate? Logic would indicate that they would need to be registered as a Reform Party member somewhere.
Arizona may have been affiliated with the RPUSA in 2003 however Rodney Martin was not a member of the RPAZ at that time. Currently Rodney Martin is expelled from the RPUSA. Last I heard he was registered as a Democrat.
It has been reported that Rodney Martin did not attend this meeting; yet Rodney Martin was listed as being elected Vice Chairman.
Questions that need to be answered are did he supposedly qualify to be elected under the 2003 Constitution and rules? Did Rodney Martin supposedly qualify be elected under the current Constitution and rules? Did Rodney Martin accept the nomination before he was elected?
The True Reformer stated that Nebraska, Oregon, Florida, Mississippi, Louisiana, Texas, Pennsylvania, and New Jersey was represented. Did RPRI and RPPA attend this meeting; conflicting information needs to be brought forward?
From information reported here; how can we conclude that all the delegates were properly credentialed as delegates from the states supposedly represented at the Dallas meeting?
Ken Jones
Ken, you can stop taxing your brain. YOU (and your tiny gang) don’t get to “conclude” anything.
The Honorable Carl Ginsberg, Judge, 193rd District Court of Texas in Dallas County, is the only one who gets to determine or “conclude” anything re. the convention in Dallas.
Once the convention was ordered and the Receiver was appointed (Receiver = agent of the judge, who acts with his authority), you and Blare were out of the picture. You think you “removed” the case from Dallas to NY — but that’s not possible. You would do well to do a little legal research on your own instead of listening to Blare who thinks he can just declare that he doesn’t recognize a court’s jurisdiction (you ought to check that out, too).
And then there’s the little matter of the federal law that requires ALL courts in the country (federal and state) to give the same effect as they have in the state where they were issued to the judicial determinations made “on the merits” (as opposed to defaults) in ALL other courts in the country.
You and TheTrueReformist should hook up for the future. All indications are you’d make a good partnership.
Bev
Bev
If federal law requires ALL courts in the country (federal and state) to give the same effect as they have in the state where they were issued to the judicial determinations made “on the merits†(as opposed to defaults) in ALL other courts in the country; I would guess the NY court has just as much authority as the Dallas court; all that is required is that rulings are based “on the merits” of the case. That is great news to me.
Your meeting wasn’t even called properly.
Ken
Ken
Ken, if you think the convention in Dallas wasn’t called properly, you should file a complaint in the TX case, saying so. If you don’t do that, you will have waived your right to complain about it.
“on the merits” means after all parties-to-the-case have presented their side (evidence and testimony) to the court.
Bev
Bev:
You can say what you want about me. I have seen enough of you to last me a lifetime!! I have never seen such arrogance from someone who has never even won a political office. I recognize the Dallas Convention as Legitimate as I have stated before. But I also recognize my right to disaffilliate. So you might as well stop calling the people in Florida, no one is answering or returning your calls. Ever wonder why???
I find it hilarious that you would tell someone who says your ( and I truely mean your ) convention was a fraud to get together with someone who states your convention was legitimate. This is proof to how screwed up you actually are!!
The Reform Party will never go anywhere with you in it!!!
Hey Beverly — since you keep touting about some “federal law” that binds all courts in the land, regardless of level, to uphold some decision made by the lowest court in the land — then why don’t you put “YOUR FACTS” where your mouth is and show & tell all the rest of us just where this “federal law” can be found that you claim is binding?
The reality is that no court outside its own jurisdiction is bound by anything from some other court UNLESS a court decision comes from the U.S. Supreme Court, or from Federal Legislation that all States must adopt! Dah, perhaps you’ve had your head stuck up RRoO for so long that you cannot see daylight anymore!
Had Martin & Blare properly challenged your lack of standing & jurisdiction in Dallas, this so-called “convention” of yours could never have occurred — so you can thank both Martin & Blare for giving you a “gift” so your-faction could pretend to become legitimate! And three SPO’s (NE, MS, LA) do not make a “national party”! BUT regardless, as we all know, your “standing” is NULL & VOID outside of Dallas County until taken to a higher court!
So show us “your law” and show us your meeting minutes, credential report and financial report — come on Bev — be TRANSPARENT for a change — restore our “trust” or lack thereof in you once again!
Here ya go, Jerry, and Ken, et al:
Federal law requiring ALL courts to give effect to ALL other courts judicial proceedings (read it and weep – if you can understand it):
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/28/1738.html
To “True” —
I stand by my statement that you and Ken Jones would make a good partnership. Recognizing, or not, the legitimacy of the convention in Dallas has nothing to do with it (the only recognition that matters is Judge Ginsberg’s). It’s a “birds of a feather” thing.
Anyone who resorts to name calling or personal attacks does so because they can’t win in debates on the merits. Of course, winning “on the merits” requires the ability to listen to what others say, to make counter-arguments, and to separate reality from perception or wishful thinking.
All your self-important chest-thumping pales in comparison to the Mississippi Reform Party’s accomplishments. The MS RP has run candidates for federal and state office in multiple elections, and a number of it’s candidates have received double digit percentages in the general election. In fact, one of the MS RP delegates, that you deride, received 17% in a general election. What’s the highest vote percentage any of your candidates has received?
For all your bravado, Florida is one of the, if not THE, easiest states in the country for a minor party to become ballot qualified. If you cared about anyone but yourself you would pull your head out and look up the requirements for states like TX, NC, PA, and MI – the FL RP wouldn’t be on the ballot in any of these states.
But, no, I haven’t wondered about any unanswered or unreturned phone calls from Florida. Why? I haven’t placed any call(s) to Florida since the convention.
The Reform Party will never grow with petty, small-minded people, and/or those obsessed with having their own way. To those types I say “don’t let the door hit you……”
Bev
You have once again managed to double talk yourself. Doing everything you have accused me of doing, that I did not do. Typical Bev Kennedy Fashion. Haven’t you ever wondered why you can’t get along with anyone??? No One can get along with you. You are the small minded person obsessed with having your own way. You are flat out lying about not making calls to Florida. Now I know you are twisted and a liar. Florida doesn’t need you. We will do just fine without you. I’ll bet David does not share your sentiment. No one mentioned Mississippi, so you need to check your self.
I wonder what you’ll be doing when the only state you have left is Texas. We already have more states with us then you even have ballot access in. Try 3 to 1, Check Mate. Why don’t you try worrying about the good of candidates running instead of your idiotic rants.
Actually if I partnered with Ken, we would crush you Beverly. You are on a self distruct mission!!!
Bev…Give us a break for having intelligence that exceeds your naivety! Here’s what you listed: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/28/1738.html
And here’s what it says:
“The Acts of the legislature of any State, Territory, or Possession of the United States, or copies thereof, shall be authenticated by affixing the seal of such State, Territory or Possession thereto.
The records and judicial proceedings of any court of any such State, Territory or Possession, or copies thereof, shall be proved or admitted in other courts within the United States and its Territories and Possessions by the attestation of the clerk and seal of the court annexed, if a seal exists, together with a certificate of a judge of the court that the said attestation is in proper form.
Such Acts, records and judicial proceedings or copies thereof, so authenticated, shall have the same full faith and credit in every court within the United States and its Territories and Possessions as they have by law or usage in the courts of such State, Territory or Possession from which they are taken.”
Now take note: “shall be proved or admitted in other courts within the United States and its Territories and Possessions”! What this refers to is the authenticity of documents from other jurisdictions, it has NOTHING to do with the veracity of the document content!
Dah — you sat in trial for over a week in Tallahassee and saw this very thing in document after document entered into evidence — and still YOU DON’T UNDERSTAND! No wonder when the Jury Verdict came in AGAINST YOU — you sat there in shock pounding on the table with your over-sized “Tourist Pencil” — until the Judge made your attorney “quiet you down” so to speak!
Finally, in case you don’t know it, the “STANDING” of any party may be challenged at any time, in any court of the land, at any stage of a case, including a Court of Appeal — and that dear-woman is something that Texas cannot sustain nor your new-fake-title from your “one-county-court-party-of-one”!
You and your cronies have finally painted yourself into a corner — and that’s where you will stay while the rest of the RPUSA moves Onward without you! Them there’s the reality, Bev…!
Which part of “Such …judicial proceedings or copies thereof, so authenticated, shall have the same full faith and credit in every court within the United States and its Territories and Possessions as they have by law or usage in the courts of such State, Territory or Possession from which they are taken” do you not understand?
Is it the “shall have the same full faith and credit in every court within the United States”?
Or is it the “shall have the same full faith and credit”? Maybe you don’t know what full faith and credit is.
Of course, you chose to ignore Judge Hinkle’s adoption of your part of the Magistrate’s Judge’s Report and Recommendation – you know, the part that said you and your group were obviously infringing on the RPUSA’s trademarks.
One would think that anybody and everybody would know that a “committee” has to be created by an actual entity. A candidate committee has to be created by a candidate — a party committee (i.e. the national committee of a political party) has to be created by a party. Not you, of course.
But then, you also think that a payment that was arbitrarily deemed to be for some other purpose than for “the” nominating convention is theft.
There just is no limit to dumb.
Bev has not only been on a self destruct mission; she believes she is the RPUSA and has been on a mission to destroy the vision of RPUSA of a govenrment of the people by the people and for the people. A government controled by votes from the congressional district up with a political organization controlled by party members in the congressional districts up.
Once the Bev is finally put out of commission we will be free to build the RPUSA to represent the people.
I have watched for far to many years how the RPUSA has split, split, split and split again, by those seeking to control. Now that Bev has isolated herself; it is up the remaining SPO to agree to work for the restoration of the freedoms guaranteed under the Constitution of the USA by restoring the RPUSA to control by all party members from the districts up.
Bev… your IGNORANCE (i.e., lack-of-knowledge) is too great to overcome with FACTS, or so it seems once again or as usual!!! The only thing the little tidbit of law you quoted applies to is the FACT OF FILING a document that can be recognized in any jurisdiction — like a birth, or marriage, or divorce certificate, etc.! It does NOT APPLY to legal matters that can be challenged in a higher court of jurisdiction!
Are you really that foolish to believe that a HIGHER COURT is bound by some lower court like a magistrate or county court??? If so, then you are far more feeble with Alzheimer’s than most of us have suspected! Is that why the Federal Courts in both Tallahassee & Gainesville REJECTED your attempted pro se filings??? Why didn’t you use your “new found law” on them? Yeah, right!
And IF you could read something for its face value instead of reading INTO IT WHAT YOU WANT TO SEE — then perhaps you would REMEMBER THAT JUDGE HINKLE RESCINDED (that means OVERTURNED) ALL PREVIOUS ORDERS from the Federal Magistrate and started the Tallahassee Case DE NOVO leading into the trial, and its three-parts, etc. — which HE ORDERED! That’s what was also discussed on the teleconference when all the Defendants asked for a JURY TRIAL — and the recommendations of the Federal Magistrate were SPECIFICALLY CHALLENGED! Dah, were you absent that day or just not talking with your attorney, Byrne?
As for the phony claims to having a “trademark”, etc., those issues IF APPLICABLE were to be tried in the THIRD PHASE of the trial — IF YOU COULD SUSTAIN YOURSELF IN BOTH THE FIRST & SECOND which your side lost big time in the First Phase! And as far as that goes, there are no “trademarks” for political parties since political parties are comprised of GENERIC WORDS / NAMES! Dah, did you miss that day as well???
Your problem Bev is that you’ve been so self-bloated by your own self-importance that you utterly fail to realize that NO ONE CARES whether you’re there or not — and most prefer NOT! In 2002 Denver you were shown the door at the NatCom meeting — then again in Tallahassee — and now thanks to the Dallas County Court you’ve entered a room with no one in it, BUT YOU! Now you can be Queen for a Day, Week, Month or whatever — you can say what you want for as long as you want — and you can share your crown with Janelle & Ted! Ha! That ought to be fun……!!!!
I am starting to think that everyone in this party is wrong. I think a lot of people will agree with me on that one… hell I will bet everyone will agree with me on that one. All I read about is court order this, and court order that, judge said this, and that judge said that.
Maybe I am too brand new to all of this, but why don’t we just regionalize the party. Then you only have a few states working with each other until we get all of this craziness settled out. It seems like the states are grouped into one way this and one way that.
Think about the Northeast we would have three decent states in shape in Rhode Island, Maine, and Pennsylvania, and possibly Conn.
In the southeast… well that is a bit tough because right now you just have Florida.
Southwest there you would have Mississippi, LA, Texas, and New Mexico with somewhat active SPO’s.
Upper Midwest you have Michigan, Ohio, West virginia, and Minnesota.
While the centralized Midwest would have Missouri, Nebraska, and Kansas.
The pacific coast would feature Nevada, Colorado, California, and Oregon.
I am 18 years old and I can figure this out… I don’t understand how you can’t. What is so hard in contacting 3-5 states a piece and starting regionalized reform parties. Then in 2012 we all meet up and have a “real” convention. Hire someone from the LP, GP, CP, or whatever party to host it for us so we know it’s all fair. Bring in people like Sam Brownback(for terms limits), Ralph Nader, Mike Gravel, etc to speak and give us some media attention at a local and internet level.
I’m from the Northeast and I am willing to work on stopping the national entity and just starting little regionalized reform party networks that meets possibly twice a year. Here is this… Northeast meetup we do one in Providence (anybody can get there), and do another in Philly.
Oh well, maybe I am just so insane and not knowing I belong in the RP. It’s sad two parties that don’t fit the major grouping of americans in the LP and GP and they continue to slay us.
Jake
An interesting idea. The problem remains and the problem is the Bev et al. We can’t stop the national entity.
Your correct in stating the court said this the judge said that. These court cases have been blamed on the wrong person(‘s). The truth is that Bev Kennedy started every one of these court cases. It has been stated that she has initiated over 24 different court cases. Do you expect her to stop?
I haven’t worked at building the Reform party here in CT since 2000 simply because Bev is still trying to take over the leadership of the Reform Party and run it as a political party controlled from the top down. I am simply not interested in participating in a political party controlled from the top down.
Florida finally seems to have realized the problem. Florida has done what every state needs to do in building the Reform Party in their state.
Yet it puzzles me in that Florida claims that the Dallas meeting was legitimate.
I would ask the leadership from Florida, if each delegate sent from MS and every other state for that matter represented the congressional district where they resided? Mississippi is entitled to six congressional delegates one from each district. How many employees did Ted Weil bring to the Dallas meeting to ensure he would get the nod to be the presidential candidate for the Reform Party? Not likely that each district was represented in MS how many delegates did MS send?
Did the RPRI have a delegate represented from RI in violation to the rules and desires of the RI SPO?
Was Jeff Maclausky from PA credentialed as a delegate from PA in violation to the rules and desires of the PA SPO?
The Dallas meeting was called on the premise that not everyone entitled to notice received notice. Well did everyone entitled to notice to the Dallas meeting receive notice? According to Skip Foley NO; as a matter of fact I can name at least four others that was not noticed of the Dallas meeting. Can the Dallas meeting be called legitimate?
How can a receiver allow newly registered Reform Party members who were not registered to the RP in 2003 to participate in the Dallas meeting and not allow the IPNY to attend? Why wasn’t NYIP not noticed?
How can it be said that the call to a Convention in Dallas TX was made properly? Rules in the 2003 Constitution for any call to convention were simply not followed.
Ken Jones
KJones6105@aol.com
Jake, the real problem in the Reform Party is pretty simple (excluding Jerry Heinemann and his perceptions). There have been two diametrically opposed groups within the Reform Party:
– one that knows what a political party is and is not, and intends for the Reform Party to be and function as a real political party. This is the group that attended the convention in Dallas.
– one that wants the Reform Party to be a membership organization (like UWSA), but that can endorse candidates from any party. This is the group that did not attend the Dallas convention – John Blare, Ken Jones.
The problem is twofold:
1) A political party and a membership organization require two different structures to function. The two groups can not peacefully co-exist in the same organization.
2) A membership organization can not be formed for the primary purpose of “influencing federal elections” – by federal law. A political party is formed for the specific purpose of “influencing elections.” Again, these two groups can not co-exist in the same organization.
A political party only exists in states – the FEC has a good explanation of this in their party guide “Appendix A.” http://www.fec.gov/info/PartyGuide/AppendixA.htm
A national party is the whole group of affiliated state parties – the composite of state parties. The national party only exists when all the state parties are meeting in convention. The purpose of a national party is to nominate one presidential candidate that each of the state parties will put on their ballot – the office of president is the only “national office” so is the only office that can be nominated by more than one political party.
A national party authorizes a political committee (the “national committee” of a political party) – to handle the national finances. This is required by federal law. The primary purpose of a party’s national committee is to provide funds to the state parties candidates for federal office (the new campaign finance laws limit the national committee to financing of federal office candidates) – to add to the candidate’s own campaign coffers. The “national committee” may have other duties assigned to it by the national party – delegated authority from the national convention, which usually includes arrangements for the next meeting/convention of the national party so the state parties don’t have to do it themselves.
Hopefully this will give you enough information to keep you from getting too confused by all the mis-information that has been posted here.
Bev
Jake…Once again, as you can see, Beverly Kennedy (TX) is providing several “half-truths” but not the whole truth according to State & Federal Regulations! Legitimate State Party Organizations (SPO’s) comprise a real national party that is supposed to be governed by a “national committee”! The fundamental problem is that the RPUSA has never had a governing document that permits a governing “national committee” until the CHARTER & BYLAWS was passed by a handful of legitimate SPO’s on 04 April 2004. See http://www.rpnc.org !
What the RPUSA has had as a failed governing document has been a series of “RPUSA Constitutions” all essentially having the same defects — that of operating as a POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE (PAC), much like the Libertarian Party (LP)! But unlike the LP, the RPUSA has historically permitted legitimate SPO’s to coexist with “paper-shell”, i.e., “name only” groups with no shred of legitimacy at the state or federal levels!
As a direct & proximate result, these “name only” groups have “bastardized” each annual meeting to such an extent that NO POSITIVE CHANGES have occurred since the first & only true nominating convention held at 2000 Long Beach, California. And like Ken Jones has indicated, Beverly Kennedy and her cohorts have continuously sued the RPUSA beginning in 1999 every time she does not get her way! She has lost every lawsuit so far — even though she may think that the recent Dallas County lawsuit was a success, it has no force or effect outside of Dallas County! That’s why it was not fully challenged inside of Dallas County.
What is ironic is her statement that the “Dallas- faction” is allegedly the “one that knows what a political party is and is not, and intends for the Reform Party to be and function as a real political party”! What makes this a farce is that in Texas there is no legitimate SPO, nor have they ever had ballot access for a “Reform Party” candidate, nor have they run qualified candidates for public office — yet they pretend to know how to run a political party at the “national level” when they have failed to even qualify at the “county level”! And on top of that, Kennedy herself is listed as one of the persons responsible for the theft of $333,558.00 plus interest stolen from FEC Matching Funds provided to the 2000 RPUSA Convention Committee of which she was a member! That case also ended last 1 March in the USDC, Gainesville, N.D. Florida.
AND if you wish to prove these statements as either “true or false” — just ask dear-ole-Bev to sent you a copy of “her rules” (i.e., her version of the RPUSA Constitution) that she’s been carrying around in a brown paper bag & tried to impose upon the RPUSA in 2002 Denver, but was laughed out of the meeting room! These were the same “rules” REJECTED by the Federal Jury Verdict in the USDC, Tallahassee, N.D. Florida last June — and the same ones that she now claims were adopted at the Dallas-meeting of only three legitimate SPO’s — TEXAS NOT INCLUDED!
Incidentally, your concept of “Regional Parties” was put into effect from 2000 to 2004 while I was the Regional Representative for NERRP (Northeast Regional Reform Party). We successfully had our own website and adopted the “10 POINTS of REFORM for AMERICA”, as an updated and practical political platform for Reform candidates — again, see http://www.rpnc.org !
Finally, Jake, while the RPUSA may seem totally disoriented at this time, things really are getting better! There are now three groupings: (1) those legitimate SPO’s that officially adopted the 2004 Charter & Bylaws and reconstituted the Reform Party National Committee (RPNC) to establish a real political party; (2) those real SPO’s plus “name only” groups still under the 2003 RPUSA Constitution functioning as a PAC; and (3) those legitimate SPO’s that disaffiliated and are functioning as “independent” SPO’s in their respective States.
Soon when enough legitimate SPO’s adopt the Charter & Bylaws, then the RPUSA will be united again and no more “name only” groups containing folks like Bev and her “Dallas-faction”! Their recent meeting painted them into a corner where they will remain since they really do not know how to build a real political party! Thanks for your interest….