Year: 2004

FLIP-FLOPPER-IN-CHIEF

Click here for an American Progress compilation of 30 major Bush policy flip-flops . . . or here to print it out as a poster.

Example:

1. Social Security Surplus

BUSH PLEDGES NOT TO TOUCH SOCIAL SECURITY SURPLUS… “We’re going to keep the promise of Social Security and keep the government from raiding the Social Security surplus.” [President Bush, 3/3/01]

…BUSH SPENDS SOCIAL SECURITY SURPLUS The New York Times reported that “the president’s new budget uses Social Security surpluses to pay for other programs every year through 2013, ultimately diverting more than $1.4 trillion in Social Security funds to other purposes.” [The New York Times, 2/6/02]

IT’S 10 O’CLOCK. DO YOU KNOW WHO YOUR VICE PRESIDENT IS?

Many credit him with being the most powerful veep in American history, with a major hand in directing the course of your country, and thus your children’s future. Do you really know the first thing about him? Click here for T.D. Allman’s profile.

Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction. There is no doubt he is amassing them to use against our friends, against our allies, and against us. – Vice President Dick Cheney, August 2002

LET US NOW SMEAR FREEDOM-LOVING PHILANTHROPISTS

No one has given more money to foster liberty and democracy than George Soros. But if you can smear war heroes, why not philanthropists? Thanks to Jesse Kornbluth’s Swami Uptown for pointing me to this exchange between House Speaker Dennis Hastert – third in line for the Presidency after the aforementioned Dick Cheney – and Fox News’s Chris Wallace.

HASTERT: You know, I don’t know where George Soros gets his money. I don’t know where – if it comes overseas or from drug groups or where it comes from. And I…

WALLACE: Excuse me?

HASTERT: Well, that’s what he’s been for a number years – George Soros has been for legalizing drugs in this country. So, I mean, he’s got a lot of ancillary interests out there.

WALLACE: You think he may be getting money from the drug cartel?

HASTERT: I’m saying I don’t know where groups – could be people who support this type of thing. I’m saying we don’t know. The fact is we don’t know where this money comes from.

And how about this characterization of Soros, which Jesse says was posted on the GOPAC website last year (‘the premier training organization for Republican candidates for elected office’):

No other single person represents the symbol and the substance of globalism more than this Hungarian-born descendant of Shylock. He is the embodiment of the Merchant from Venice.

Shylock, lest anyone’s memory need refreshing, was Shakespeare’s merciless, miserly Jew.

There must be many fine Republicans who are appalled by all this. Help us help you get your party back. Vote Kerry.

QUICK – IF YOU KNOW SOMEONE LIVING ABROAD

This site will help them get an absentee ballot in time to be heard. But hurry!

#

Have a great weekend!
If you live in Frances’s path . . . stay safe.
Don’t forget that Cheney profile.

POLICIES MATTER

Change* in real median household income
(2003 adjusted dollars):

Change* in number of Americans living in poverty:

*As gleaned by the Daily Kos from this month’s Census report

REALLY

I know some folks don’t Like numbers, but force yourself to look at those and see if a pattern suggests itself. (I put the Bush numbers in red and the Clinton numbers in blue.) Do you see how Americans tend to get poorer under the Bushes?

WE MAY NOT ALL BE ABOVE AVERAGE, BUT GARRISON KEILLOR IS

August 27, 2004
We’re Not in Lake Wobegon Anymore
By Garrison Keillor

Something has gone seriously haywire with the Republican Party. Once, it was the party of pragmatic Main Street businessmen in steel-rimmed spectacles who decried profligacy and waste, were devoted to their communities and supported the sort of prosperity that raises all ships. They were good-hearted people who vanquished the gnarlier elements of their party, the paranoid Roosevelt-haters, the flat Earthers and Prohibitionists, the antipapist antiforeigner element. The genial Eisenhower was their man, a genuine American hero of D-Day, who made it OK for reasonable people to vote Republican.

He brought the Korean War to a stalemate, produced the Interstate Highway System, declined to rescue the French colonial army in Vietnam, and gave us a period of peace and prosperity, in which (oddly) American arts and letters flourished and higher education burgeoned-and there was a degree of plain decency in the country. Fifties Republicans were giants compared to today’s. Richard Nixon was the last Republican leader to feel a Christian obligation toward the poor.

In the years between Nixon and Newt Gingrich, the party migrated southward down the Twisting Trail of Rhetoric and sneered at the idea of public service and became the Scourge of Liberalism, the Great Crusade Against the Sixties, the Death Star of Government, a gang of pirates that diverted and fascinated the media by their sheer chutzpah, such as the misty-eyed flag-waving of Ronald Reagan who, while George McGovern flew bombers in World War II, took a pass and made training films in Long Beach.

The Nixon moderate vanished like the passenger pigeon, purged by a legion of angry white men who rose to power on pure punk politics. ‘Bipartisanship is another term of date rape,’ says Grover Norquist, the Sid Vicious of the GOP. ‘I don’t want to abolish government. I simply want to reduce it to the size where I can drag it into the bathroom and drown it in the bathtub.’ The boy has Oedipal problems and government is his daddy.

The party of Lincoln and Liberty was transmogrified into the party of hairy-backed swamp developers and corporate shills, faith-based economists, fundamentalist bullies with Bibles, Christians of convenience, freelance racists, misanthropic frat boys, shrieking midgets of AM radio, tax cheats, nihilists in golf pants, brownshirts in pinstripes, sweatshop tycoons, hacks, fakirs, aggressive dorks, Lamborghini libertarians, people who believe Neil Armstrong’s moonwalk was filmed in Roswell, New Mexico, little honkers out to diminish the rest of us, Newt’s evil spawn and their Etch-A-Sketch president, a dull and rigid man suspicious of the free flow of information and of secular institutions, whose philosophy is a jumble of badly sutured body parts trying to walk. Republicans: The No.1 reason the rest of the world thinks we’re deaf, dumb and dangerous.

Rich ironies abound! Lies pop up like toadstools in the forest! Wild swine crowd round the public trough! Outrageous gerrymandering! Pocket lining on a massive scale! Paid lobbyists sit in committee rooms and write legislation to alleviate the suffering of billionaires! Hypocrisies shine like cat turds in the moonlight! O Mark Twain, where art thou at this hour? Arise and behold the Gilded Age reincarnated gaudier than ever, upholding great wealth as the sure sign of Divine Grace.

Here in 2004, George W. Bush is running for reelection on a platform of tragedy-the single greatest failure of national defense in our history, the attacks of 9/11 in which 19 men with box cutters put this nation into a tailspin, a failure the details of which the White House fought to keep secret even as it ran the country into hock up to the hubcaps, thanks to generous tax cuts for the well-fixed, hoping to lead us into a box canyon of debt that will render government impotent, even as we engage in a war against a small country that was undertaken for the president’s personal satisfaction but sold to the American public on the basis of brazen misinformation, a war whose purpose is to distract us from an enormous transfer of wealth taking place in this country, flowing upward, and the deception is working beautifully.

The concentration of wealth and power in the hands of the few is the death knell of democracy. No republic in the history of humanity has survived this. The election of 2004 will say something about what happens to ours. The omens are not good.

Our beloved land has been fogged with fear-fear, the greatest political strategy ever. An ominous silence, distant sirens, a drumbeat of whispered warnings and alarms to keep the public uneasy and silence the opposition. And in a time of vague fear, you can appoint bullet-brained judges, strip the bark off the Constitution, eviscerate federal regulatory agencies, bring public education to a standstill, stupefy the press, lavish gorgeous tax breaks on the rich.

There is a stink drifting through this election year. It isn’t the Florida recount or the Supreme Court decision. No, it’s 9/11 that we keep coming back to. It wasn’t the ‘end of innocence,’ or a turning point in our history, or a cosmic occurrence, it was an event, a lapse of security. And patriotism shouldn’t prevent people from asking hard questions of the man who was purportedly in charge of national security at the time.

Whenever I think of those New Yorkers hurrying along Park Place or getting off the No.1 Broadway local, hustling toward their office on the 90th floor, the morning paper under their arms, I think of that non-reader George W. Bush and how he hopes to exploit those people with a little economic uptick, maybe the capture of Osama, cruise to victory in November and proceed to get some serious nation-changing done in his second term.

This year, as in the past, Republicans will portray us Democrats as embittered academics, desiccated Unitarians, whacked-out hippies and communards, people who talk to telephone poles, the party of the Deadheads. They will wave enormous flags and wow over and over the footage of firemen in the wreckage of the World Trade Center and bodies being carried out and they will lie about their economic policies with astonishing enthusiasm.

The Union is what needs defending this year. Government of Enron and by Halliburton and for the Southern Baptists is not the same as what Lincoln spoke of. This gang of Pithecanthropus Republicanii has humbugged us to death on terrorism and tax cuts for the comfy and school prayer and flag burning and claimed the right to know what books we read and to dump their sewage upstream from the town and clear-cut the forests and gut the IRS and mark up the constitution on behalf of intolerance and promote the corporate takeover of the public airwaves and to hell with anybody who opposes them.

This is a great country, and it wasn’t made so by angry people. We have a sacred duty to bequeath it to our grandchildren in better shape than however we found it. We have a long way to go and we’re not getting any younger.

Dante said that the hottest place in Hell is reserved for those who in time of crisis remain neutral, so I have spoken my piece, and thank you, dear reader. It’s a beautiful world, rain or shine, and there is more to life than winning.

© 2004 In These Times

But first . . .

• ‘I am a friend of John Kerry’s. I think he would be a good president. … I think he is resolute, yes. … I think he is strong enough to be President.’ [John McCain on ABC Nightly News yesterday]

• If we are so much safer . . . where is Osama Bin Laden? How does having so much of the world hate us make us safer?

• Maybe it’s just me, but I don’t feel safer.

And now . . .

Each share of Borealis (BOREF) represents roughly one share in each of its four semi-public subsidiaries, Chorus Motors (CHOMF), Cool Chips (COLCF), Power chips (PWCHF), and Roche Bay (RCHBF). I say semi-public, because these stocks trade rarely, in tiny quantities, and are relegated to the Pink Sheets. At recent prices, it would cost you about $30 to buy one share in each of the four . . . or $7 if you simply bought a share of Borealis, which owns a share in each of the four.

This is not to say that the subsidiaries are worth a collective $30. They may be worth zero. But better to lose $7 than $30, in that case. And if one of these companies did prove to be worth something – a big if, to be sure – that might suggest that the others aren’t scams or pipedreams either.

With that as background – and the full disclosure to newcomers to this column that I own a ton of this wacky speculation – I offer a recent communication to the shareholders of one of the majority-owned subsidiaries. Note that with 5 million shares outstanding, selling at $7 or so each, Borealis is valued overall at $35 million – the cost of a nice corporate jet.

Chorus Motors plc Letter to Shareholders

10 August, 2004

*Fellow Members:*

We now have product and we are tendering bids for specialty Chorus® Meshcon™ and Chorus® Star™ systems for major customers.

Please look at http://www.chorusmotors.gi/press/pr_040803.shtml for our most recent press release, relating to the new test data on our Chorus Meshcon motor system. These are very heady times for Chorus Motors plc.

We have completed the basic development of the Chorus Meshcon and Chorus Star technology.

We demonstrated in June 2003 a 1.5 horsepower motor and in June 2004 we completed development of a plug- and-play 20-hp Chorus Meshcon motor system. We are now in a position to be a substantial virtual producer of these motor systems that transform the engineering envelope for electric motors. Test results, posted recently on the Chorus Motors Website, show that a Chorus Meshcon system can produce at least five times more startup torque than a comparable conventional drive system, using strict criteria for a true apples to apples comparison.

This new capability means that motors (Chorus, of course) can now be used in many applications where previously no motor could offer the combination of high torque, small size and light weight required. The market for Chorus systems will thus be broader than the current market for electric motors as Chorus replaces not only conventional motors, but also hydraulic and pneumatic systems and even internal-combustion engines for many purposes. Indeed, we have spent much of the past year designing Chorus systems for highly-demanding (and in some cases novel) applications for major corporations. While it takes significant time for us to design and customers to evaluate these new systems, we expect that some of these designs will lead to large and multi-year supply contracts.

Let us give a little background on what has happened here from our viewpoint and perspective. With our working plug-and-play 20-hp Chorus Meshcon motor, we have in hand the culmination of decades of work by many research teams in the United States. For almost as long as the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) has existed, it has been funding programs looking for a “better”, “more efficient” and higher-torque electric motor.

In our opinion, motor R&D has been very weak for decades. The main textbooks were written in the 1950s, and the really seminal work was done around a century ago and published from 1915 to 1917. Motor companies learned the hard way since the early days of spectacular advances in understanding and the ability to build motors that spending money on research was a waste – because for so many years it was.

In the late 1950s the advent of power silicon, and its capability to synthesize variable frequency power was the first serious advance in over 50 years. Initially silicon-controlled rectifiers (SCRs) came on-line in the 1960s, but they could not do a proper sine wave because they could not switch fast enough. The transistor had a faster switching speed, allowing pulse-width-modulation (pwm), but there was a problem: making variable frequency drives requires a microprocessor. So while inverters were available for motors in the 1960s, they did not become a major part of the supply chain and normal corporate offerings until the 1990s.

Partially this slow adoption was a result of the technology not being available. Motor companies were also slow to adopt electronic drives because they saw little competitive advantage in doing so. In this, they were basically correct: it took from the 1960s to today to make electronic drives relatively common. Nobody in the business today currently selling product into the market has a truly superior technology solution which gives them proprietary pricing, margins are thin, and strong profits are not to be found in this commodity industry.

Chorus started working in this business for three reasons: We saw that the industry did not aggressively research breakthrough technologies. We saw that the market size, at more than $100 billion yearly, meant that if something really special did come along there would be a superb opportunity to profit. Most important of all, we had a researcher who convinced us early on that he really understood AC electric motors at a level that perhaps no one since their inventor, Nikola Tesla, has even approached.

The few researchers left in the field are primarily academics, and they have done an excellent job of furthering the incremental advances still possible with standard brushless and AC induction technologies. These advances include better ways to control a given drive, better ways to make high-speed machines, and still-better ways to crowd out harmonics by simulating more perfect sine waves.

When we started making Chorus machines back in the mid-1990s, we set out to try to go back to the basics. So instead of working in an area which already had researchers (such as vector-field control), we went in an entirely new direction with high phase order machines and concentrated windings. Instead of minimizing harmonics, as everyone else was doing, we explicitly embraced them.

There is no surprise that nobody else went in this direction. Academics were not doing basic research any more, and nobody would have funded such work. Motor companies had learned not to invest in research anyway – and certainly not in something which would take time to pan out.

The best candidates might have been companies making inverters (certainly we have found that drives engineers have been the quickest to understand Chorus Meshcon), but their direct focus on immediate products meant that they would not invest in or invent a strategic shift such as Chorus.

So the field was left wide open, and we drove right in. This is why our patent coverage is so strong: nobody had previously understood what could be achieved with high-phase-order drives and concentrated windings.

In terms of basic concepts, Chorus Meshcon could not have been demonstrated 20 or perhaps even 10 years ago. The computing hardware was not there, and it is still not there in the digital signal processors used by most drive companies and researchers. We are using processors that are now inexpensive and common. But they had no equal just five years ago.

Our progress has certainly not been smooth. It has been painfully slow with many false hopes and starts. Now, over ten years later, we have developed Chorus Meshcon and Chorus Star. We have shown that our technology is superior to any other motor/drive in the world capable of the same torque-speed profile. And Chorus Motors owns 100% of this proprietary patented technology.

Instead of trying to work with new materials or a new control paradigm, we have cheerfully adopted all of the excellent incremental work done in the three-phase world. We use standard materials, standard bearings, and standard control modules. This is why it is possible for Semikron® Limited to make our drives, and a normal motor manufacturer can wind a Chorus machine. Our building blocks are the same – we just think about the way those blocks should be assembled differently from anyone else. And what makes it all so much fun is that our motors and drives outperform any other system and we provide a huge increase in the size of the available engineering envelope.

We are currently bidding on several large orders. We are increasingly confident that the adoption of our science will be quick, as our technology allows companies to increase their engineering envelope and thus opens new and huge markets for electric motors.

Again, we are initially going after the high-value sales. Chorus Motors is becoming a spectacular business.

*Our Organizational Structure*

Chorus Motors plc is a public quoted company trading under the symbol CHOMF. Chorus Motors is a majority-owned subsidiary of Borealis Exploration Limited. Our immediate parent is Borealis’ 98%-owned subsidiary, Borealis Technical Limited, which owns all patents on the Chorus Star and Meshcon technologies and has licensed them exclusively to Chorus Motors plc.

Chorus Motors plc has 10,000,000 shares authorized and, at fiscal year-end, had 6,396,467 shares outstanding, of which Borealis owned 5,222,672 shares, or 82% of the total. Both Borealis and Chorus Motors plc are incorporated in Gibraltar.

Our headquarters and legal domicile are in Gibraltar, Chorus Motors operates as a virtual company, and the Internet plays a dominant role in our day-to-day work. It is the means by which we manage our businesses, discuss new ideas, and promote ourselves to the outside world.

Modern communications technology has allowed us to circumvent the traditional problems associated with working on four continents and twenty time zones. Because of this, we have access to facilities and personnel about which a company of our size would normally only be able to dream.

Chorus has consultants around the world, all of whom work over e-mail. Management and technical discussions take place over the Internet. Chorus Motors runs a continual Board of Directors meeting 24 x 365, with an annual traffic of well over 3,000 messages to each board member. Chorus has intense direct participatory management, and many consultants to the Company sit in on the board meetings and provide input even while they are not voting members.

Our Website, www.chorusmotors.gi, makes information about our technology available, and informs shareholders, other companies, and the general public about Chorus Motors. The Website is frequently updated, and our major disclosed technologies are described on the site in detail. Additionally, Borealis sends out a weekly update (as well as daily share trades with its prices) to shareholders and to all the major news organizations and other interested parties, detailing Chorus’ ongoing work and progress (please e-mail pr@chorusmotors.gi if you would like to receive these updates). Through this wide distribution, we are able to keep people better informed than through traditional channels.

Your management uses this technology to maintain a close relationship with our shareholders. This virtual company structure is great to work with and allows us to have many people directly involved in the decision-making processes at Chorus. This approach may not be conventional, but the results to date have validated the business structure.

*Patents and Intellectual Property*

Borealis Technical Limited so far has been granted a number of patents for its Chorus Motor and Meshcon technologies, and we are applying for additional patents as our continuing research warrants. In fiscal 2004 we were granted three new patents related to Chorus’ technologies. We have recently, for example, received patents covering the winding of electric motors and the Meshcon and Chorus technologies; we believe these are among the most significant patents granted for electric motor technology in almost a century.

We are confident that some of our patents will be judged by the courts as “pioneer” patents, reflecting the fact that they represent a technical revolution in the motor field. Pioneer patents are those to which most later patents in a field make reference, or on which later patents build by adding new improvements to the field. Because pioneer patents represent the result of groundbreaking scientific discoveries or development, the courts have found that they merit a wide breadth of protection in construing their claims and specifications.

Because our scientific discoveries and technical advances are the core of our business, we are very careful about protecting these assets. Patenting and otherwise protecting our technologies is an important activity at Chorus and consumes a considerable portion of our resources. We have developed a valuable library of intellectual property and we intend to protect it vigorously.

Chorus Motors plc also owns 100% of a technology, which we have not previously disclosed, and to which we refer internally as “DeepG”. The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office has approved this patent for issue and we are awaiting its formal issue. This patent is very long, and it covers the basic control technology of generator systems known in the trade as “gensets”. We expect that the technology covered by this patent will enable motors operated as generators to operate with radically improved efficiency and sharply reduced energy consumption.

If properly managed and marketed, this technology will generate significant revenues for a very long time with virtually no capital investment in plant or equipment. We have worked on this technology for about 10 years, and we are now considering alternative business models for capitalizing on the technology. One option under consideration is to give the product away in return for 18% of the user’s monthly fuel savings. The profitability will be very much a collection issue but, like Microsoft Corporation, we believe that we can manage a product that has basically no manufacturing cost but generates substantial licensing revenue.

We initially expect to get paid through license fees by the large companies using the technology and hopefully we can get paid by most users of this technology worldwide. It should be noted that this is another stand-alone business with huge revenue and profit potential coming from our long-standing on-going research efforts worldwide.

*Financial Report*

Chorus Motors plc has all its bills paid by Borealis Technical Limited and as such has noliabilities of any kind. In return Borealis Technical Limited will receive 50% of the sublicense revenue and 8% of all other revenue generated by Chorus Motors plc.

All proceeds from private sales of Chorus shares are due back to Chorus Motors plc and these totaled $9,504,030 at fiscal 2004 year-end, compared with $7,038,069 for fiscal 2003. Stated another way, Chorus Motors plc has accounts receivable of $9,504,030 and no accounts payable, and no long-term or short-term debt.

Borealis Technical Limited collects $64,800 in annual management fees and the cumulative loss to date for your Company is $324,000.

The fiscal year ended 31 March 2004 was very active, with continual major on-going advances in our technologies. What is very unusual is that our pace of scientific advance is, if anything, speeding up.

The fiscal year-end 2004 showed 6,396,467 shares outstanding compared with 6,044,289 shares outstanding for fiscal 2003.

As Chorus Motors plc has no debt or other obligations, the Company is in an excellent position to pursue its business in an industry that has long been very immune to any change.

The technical advances have continued year in and year out and are now really picking up. With the business model we are using of the Chorus Club, we expect a very long life for our continued scientific advances.  We now have products to sell and are working intensely to do so. It is difficult to make any sales in such a stable industry. That said, because of our financial structure and position, we can continue our scientific advances and development work for many years until this industry finally adopts our technology.

We thank everybody for their help and for their support. This has been a long tough road to run down, where we have made many mistakes, gone down numerous technological dead ends and have finally arrived at the other end vastly enlarging the engineering envelope for electric motors.

Changing basic industries is not easy. The motor industry will only change as we go directly to the industry’s customers and provide them with vastly improved product at competitive pricing.

When and if we are allowed to talk of the business we are generating all of our shareholders will be very pleased with our customers and our partners.

Chorus Motors plc owns the proprietary and patented technology that will be the dominant technology in electric motors for generations to come. In the long run, we will dominate this industry. We want the long run to begin in as short a time period as possible.

Thanks again for your support, your help, your brilliance and perseverance in the face of many obstacles in getting this family of technologies from a gleam in our chief scientist’s eye to market reality.

Chorus Motors plc
Rodney T. Cox, Chairman and CEO
Isaiah W. Cox, President and COO

☞ My guess is that at least THEY believe all this stuff – and that’s something. But as always: only for money you can truly afford to lose.

There’s a lot here today, so just skim through the lines I’ve bolded. The very last item, about Bush-supporter Kid Rock, is X-Rated. Do NOT read his lyrics if you are easily offended.

THE WIND SHIFTS

From Friday’s Seattle Times:

Four years ago, this page endorsed George W. Bush for president. We cannot do so again – because of an ill-conceived war and its aftermath, undisciplined spending, a shrinkage of constitutional rights and an intrusive social agenda. The Bush presidency is not what we had in mind. Our endorsement of John Kerry is not without reservations, but he is head and shoulders above the incumbent.

From retired Rear Admiral John Hutson (as per this story on Republicans for Kerry):

I’m a Republican and I’ve never voted for a Democrat for national office in my life. I supported George Bush four years ago, but this year I’m supporting John Kerry. Senator Kerry will take America in a positive direction. He has the vision, intellect, determination, and courage to right the ship of state. I believe that under his strong leadership, our country will regain integrity and respect both domestically and internationally.

From Sue Mackenzie of Boulder, Colorado (same source):

I was a life-long Republican, my family members are all Republicans, but this year I reregistered as a Democrat because I can’t stand what the Republicans are doing to our country.

SOME REPUBLICANS GOT TO NEW YORK EARLY (AND I DON’T MEAN ARNOLD OR RUDY)

In case you missed Saturday’s New York Times:

August 28, 2004
Club of the Most Powerful Gathers in Strictest Privacy
By DAVID D. KIRKPATRICK

Three times a year for 23 years, a little-known club of a few hundred of the most powerful conservatives in the country have met behind closed doors at undisclosed locations for a confidential conference, the Council for National Policy, to strategize about how to turn the country to the right.

Details are closely guarded.

“The media should not know when or where we meet or who takes part in our programs, before of after a meeting,” a list of rules obtained by The New York Times advises the attendees.

The membership list is “strictly confidential.” Guests may attend “only with the unanimous approval of the executive committee.” In e-mail messages to one another, members are instructed not to refer to the organization by name, to protect against leaks.

This week, before the Republican convention, the members quietly convened in New York, holding their latest meeting almost in plain sight, at the Plaza Hotel, for what a participant called “a pep rally” to re-elect President Bush.

Mr. Bush addressed the group in fall 1999 to solicit support for his campaign, stirring a dispute when news of his speech leaked and Democrats demanded he release a tape recording. He did not.

Not long after the Iraq invasion, Vice President Dick Cheney and Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld attended a council meeting.

This week, as the Bush campaign seeks to rally Christian conservative leaders to send Republican voters to the polls, several Bush administration and campaign officials were on hand, according to an agenda obtained by The New York Times.

“The destiny of our nation is on the shoulders of the conservative movement,” the Senate majority leader, Bill Frist, Republican of Tennessee, told the gathering as he accepted its Thomas Jefferson award on Thursday, according to an attendee’s notes.

The secrecy that surrounds the meeting and attendees like the Rev. Jerry Falwell, Phyllis Schlafly and the head of the National Rifle Association, among others, makes it a subject of suspicion, at least in the minds of the few liberals aware of it.

“The real crux of this is that these are the genuine leaders of the Republican Party, but they certainly aren’t going to be visible on television next week,” Barry W. Lynn, executive director of Americans United for Separation of Church and State, said.

Mr. Lynn was referring to the list of moderate speakers like Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger of California and former Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani of New York who are scheduled to speak at the convention.

“The C.N.P. members are not going to be visible next week,” he said. “But they are very much on the minds of George W. Bush and Karl Rove every week of the year, because these are the real powers in the party.”

A spokesman for the White House, Trent Duffy, said: “The American people are quite clear and know what the president’s agenda is. He talks about it every day in public forums, not to any secret group of conservatives or liberals. And he will be talking about his agenda on national television in less than a week.”

The administration and re-election effort were major focuses of the group’s meeting on Thursday and yesterday. Under Secretary of State John Bolton spoke about plans for Iran, a spokesman for the State Department said.

Likewise, a spokesman for Assistant Attorney General R. Alexander Acosta confirmed that Mr. Acosta had addressed efforts to stop “human trafficking,” a major issue among Christian conservatives.

Dr. Frist spoke about supporting Mr. Bush and limiting embryonic stem cell research, two attendees said. Dan Senor, who recently returned from Iraq after working as a spokesman for L. Paul Bremer III, the top American civilian administrator, was scheduled to provide an update on the situation there.

Among presentations on the elections, an adviser to Mr. Bush’s campaign, Ralph Reed, spoke on “The 2004 Elections: Who Will Win in November?,” attendees said.

The council was founded in 1981, just as the modern conservative movement began its ascendance. The Rev. Tim LaHaye, an early Christian conservative organizer and the best-selling author of the “Left Behind” novels about an apocalyptic Second Coming, was a founder. His partners included Paul Weyrich, another Christian conservative political organizer who also helped found the Heritage Foundation.

They said at the time that they were seeking to create a Christian conservative alternative to what they believed was the liberalism of the Council on Foreign Relations.

A statement of its mission distributed this week said the council’s purposes included “to acquaint our membership with those in positions of leadership in our nation in order that mutual respect be fostered” and “to encourage the exchange of information concerning the methodology of working within the system to promote the values and ends sought by individual members.”

Membership costs several thousand dollars a year, a participant said. Its executive director, Steve Baldwin, did not return a phone call.

Over the years, the council has become a staging ground for conservative efforts to make the Republican Party more socially conservative. Ms. Schlafly, who helped build a grass-roots network to fight for socially conservative positions in the party, is a longstanding member.

At times, the council has also seen the party as part of the problem. In 1998, Dr. James Dobson of Focus on the Family spoke at the council to argue that Republicans were taking conservatives for granted. He said he voted for a third-party candidate in 1996.

Opposition to same-sex marriage was a major conference theme. Although conservatives and Bush campaign officials have denied seeking to use state ballot initiatives that oppose same-sex marriage as a tool to bring out conservative voters, the agenda includes a speech on “Using Conservative Issues in Swing States,” said Phil Burress, leader of an initiative drive in Ohio, a battleground state.

The membership list this year was a who’s who of evangelical Protestant conservatives and their allies, including Dr. Dobson, Mr. Weyrich, Holland H. Coors of the beer dynasty; Wayne LaPierre of the National Riffle Association, Richard A. Viguerie of American Target Advertising, Mark Mix of the National Right to Work Committee and Grover Norquist of Americans for Tax Reform.

Not everyone present was a Bush supporter, however. This year, the council included speeches by Michael Badnarik of the Libertarian Party and Michael A. Peroutka of the ultraconservative Constitution Party. About a quarter of the members attended their speeches, an attendee said.

Nor was the gathering all business. On Wednesday, members had a dinner in the Rainbow Room, where William F. Buckley Jr. of the National Review was a special guest. At 10 p.m. on Thursday and Friday, members had “prayer sessions” in the Rose Room at the hotel.

FAVORED SON

The President made it clear in 1994, running for governor, that he got no preferential treatment in avoiding the draft. Certainly this was untrue, as evidenced by this statement you may have seen this weekend on the news . . .

My name’s Ben Barnes. I was Speaker of the Texas House when George W. Bush went into the National Guard. He got preferential treatment. I know. I gave it to him. His family sent a representative to my office and asked me to move their son up on the waiting list. And I did. It was wrong. He was jumped over hundreds of others in line. Some of them went off to Vietnam and died. I made a mistake supporting that war. And as other, less-privileged kids were going off to be killed, I helped the son of a congressman avoid combat. I wish I had not. But I think it’s time people know. And it’s time for George W. Bush to stop attacking the people who did serve.

. . . but was it a lie? That would be the case only if President Bush knew he got preferential treatment. This piece suggests that he did:

STILL UNREPORTED: THE PAY-OFF IN BUSH AIR GUARD FIX
Saturday, August 28, 2004
by Greg Palast

In 1968, former Congressman George Herbert Walker Bush of Texas, fresh from voting to send other men’s sons to Vietnam, enlisted his own son in a very special affirmative action program, the ‘champagne’ unit of the Texas Air National Guard…

This week, former Lt. Governor Ben Barnes of Texas ‘fessed up to pulling the strings to keep Little George out of the jungle. “I got a young man named George W. Bush into the Texas Air Guard – and I’m ashamed.”

That’s far from the end of the story. In 1994, George W. Bush was elected governor of Texas by a whisker. By that time, Barnes had left office to become a big time corporate lobbyist. To an influence peddler like Barnes, having damning information on a sitting governor is worth its weight in gold – or, more precisely, there’s a value in keeping the info secret.

Barnes appears to have made lucrative use of his knowledge of our President’s slithering out of the draft as a lever to protect a multi-billion dollar contract for a client.  That’s the information in a confidential letter buried deep in the files of the US Justice Department that fell into my hands at BBC television.

Here’s what happened. Just after Bush’s election, Barnes’ client GTech Corp., due to allegations of corruption, was about to lose its license to print money: its contract to run the Texas state lottery. Barnes, says the Justice Department document, made a call to the newly elected governor’s office and saved GTech’s state contract.

The letter said, “Governor Bush … made a deal with Ben Barnes not to rebid [the GTech lottery contract] because Barnes could confirm that Bush had lied during the ’94 campaign.”

In that close race, Bush denied the fix was in to keep him out of ‘Nam, and the US media stopped asking questions. What did the victorious Governor Bush’s office do for Barnes? According to the tipster, “Barnes agreed never to confirm the story [of the draft dodging] and the governor talked to the chair of the lottery two days later and she then agreed to support letting GTech keep the contract without a bid.”

And so it came to pass that the governor’s commission reversed itself and gave GTech the billion dollar deal without a bid.

The happy client paid Barnes, the keeper of Governor Bush’s secret, a fee of over $23 million. Barnes, not surprisingly, denies that Bush took care of his client in return for Barnes’ silence.  However, confronted with the evidence, the former Lt. Governor now admits to helping the young George stay out of Vietnam.

Take a look at the letter yourself – with information we confirmed with other sources – at http://www.gregpalast.com/ulf/documents/draftdodgeblanked.jpg . . .

By the way: I first reported this story in 1999, including the evidence of payback, in The Observer of London. US media closed its eyes. Then I put the story on British television last year in the one-hour report, “Bush Family Fortunes.” American networks turned down BBC’s offer to run it in the USA. “Wonderful film,” one executive told me, “but Time Warner is not going to let us put this on the air.” However, US networks will take cash for advertisements calling Kerry a Vietnam coward.

The good news is, until Patriot Act 3 kicks in, they can’t stop us selling the film to you directly. The updated version of “Bush Family Fortunes,” with the full story you still can’t see on your boob tube, will be released next month in DVD. See a preview at http://www.gregpalast.com/bff-dvd.htm.

For more on our president’s war years and the $23 million payment, read this excerpt from the New York Times bestseller, The Best Democracy Money Can Buy.

WELCOME, REPUBLICANS!

From a friend of a friend, in New York:

Wednesday, August 18, 2004 4:15 PM
Subject: knock knock

I just answered a knock at my door.  I should say that the buzzer system in my building is such that you can hear anyone being buzzed in and as I hadn’t heard a buzzer I assumed it was a neighbor.  I opened the door to a fresh faced young blond man and an equally polished young black woman.  Coming from the Northwest I assumed they were Mormon missionaries – although they are in my experience very very seldom black.  I was about to ask how they got into my building without buzzing when they showed me ID and identified themselves as FBI.  As some of you know I live on Ninth Ave about four blocks north of Madison Square Garden.  I had put a “Dump Bush” sign in my window – as I am on the third floor front it was clearly visible to Ninth Avetraffic – but had taken it down this weekend because it blocked too much light and my plants were beginning to complain.  Seems Dick & Jane (as I affectionately call them) were offended by my sign which I pointed out wasn’t even there at the moment.  They suggested that I not put it back up as it presented a traffic hazard and that I could be arrested for public endangerment.  I suggested to them – federal agents – that they should arrest me for a traffic nuisance and that after I would buy a drink for one of them to celebrate the vast sum I would be awarded from my lawsuit.

☞ And this from Steve Weissman:

. . . Last week, the New York Times reported that local FBI field offices have spent months canvassing their communities for potential “troublemakers.” The G-men claim to have developed a list of people who might be planning – or have information about the possibility of – violent and disruptive acts at the Republican National Convention and other coming political events. The Feds – and local police with whom they work – call these lists of likely suspects “intelligence.”

In Denver, four FBI agents and two local police use such lists to visit a local Quaker group that protests the war. Quakers are historically non-violent. It’s part of their religious faith. So why had the six investigators taken so much time away from chasing real terrorists?

. . . The G-Men and local police, it turns out, were acting as part of the Joint Terrorism Task Force, which shows us how Team Bush fights the War on Terror. Having used intelligence to drag the country into a preemptive war, they now want to preempt opposition to it.

. . . If the FBI and police lack a warrant and have no reason to suspect that a crime is underway, they have absolutely no legal right to enter [your home] without your permission. Why give it? No matter how friendly they seem, you have nothing to gain by letting them in. Be polite, sure. But leave it at that.

Step outside to talk to them. Ask each of them for their identification. Take it in your hand – they hate that – and jot down all the information on it. . . . Then, tell them you would love to talk to them, but only with your lawyer present. Would they care to make an appointment?

☞ Call me naïve, but I would always talk to an FBI agent who came knocking and be as helpful as I could.  We all want the FBI and other agencies to be hugely successful in fighting terrorism.  But why are they intimidating Quakers?  Next thing you know, the “freedom and liberty” folks will be handcuffing and ejecting people for wearing anti-Bush t-shirts at Fourth of July rallies!  (Click here.)  Or prosecuting them with federal funds for holding up a NO WAR FOR OIL sign!  (Here.)

KID ROCK FOR BUSH [WARNING: OFFENSIVE LANGUAGE]

I don’t know who white rapper Kid Rock voted for last time, but this time he is voting for Bush.  Reports the New York Observer:

Recently Mark McKinnon, the media director for the Bush campaign, in response to the news that Bruce Springsteen and other rock musicians would be touring to raise money for Democrats, told The New York Times that George W. Bush had his own supporters in the entertainment world. Mr. McKinnon cited in particular Lee Ann Womack, Kid Rock, and Jessica Simpson.

As a service to readers who may not be familiar with Kid Rock, the following are excerpts from his lyrics:

from “Classic Rock”:

Well guess who’s back, with a big fat cock
It’s the kid motherfucker with the classic rock
Like wax that booty, yodeleyeho, punk
Slappin you hoes with dick when I get drunk.
From Alabama to Texarkana
Bend over bitch and let me slam her ..
Playin shows, fuckin hoes
Got the dope in my veins and up my nose.

[AND IT ACTUALLY GETS WORSE FROM THERE, SO I’M CENSORING THE REST, BUT YOU CAN CHECK OUT THE OBSERVER STORY TO SEE WHAT ELSE THIS PRIZED BUSH SUPPORTER HAS TO SAY.]

But first . . .

JUST BECAUSE YOU WEREN’T THERE DOESN’T MEAN YOU CAN’T SWEAR TO WHAT HAPPENED

From the KATU website:

August 23, 2004
Local Veterans Call For Attorney’s Resignation

OREGON CITY, Ore. – Clackamas County veterans are calling for the resignation of an assistant district attorney who appeared in television ads attacking Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry’s military record.

In the ad, and a sworn affidavit, Al French says he served with Kerry and that the Purple Heart medals Kerry received were obtained under false pretenses.

However, French admitted later that he did not witness the events mentioned in the affidavit and was relying on what his friends told him.

Veteran Don Stewart says he believes it was outrageous that French would try to smear Kerry’s military record.

“Mr. French signed an affidavit defaming John Kerry’s military service and then he admitted that he had no first-hand knowledge of what he swore to,” Stewart said on Monday. “Someone who the community trusts to carry out the law cannot be lying in sworn, legal affidavits.”

On Monday, French would neither confirm nor deny the reports that he did not witness the events mentioned in the affidavit.

The Oregon State Bar says they have received enough complaints to look into the matter, with the main question being whether French violated ethics.

☞ Oh, the French.

Steve: My brother-in-law wrote the attached letter. After college he served in Vietnam and then became a Secret Service agent on presidential protection. He now is director of corporate security for a Fortune 500 company. He is not politically affiliated:

August 24, 2004

I was a Navy lieutenant serving on a river patrol boat in Vietnam two months after John Kerry was a Navy lieutenant serving on a swift boat in Vietnam. I am very disappointed in the recent controversy surrounding Kerry’s service.

Those of us who patrolled the rivers and canals in Vietnam knew the risks. For every Navy Seal killed there, five river patrol crewmen died. The casualty rate in the river patrol forces averaged nearly 60 percent. No one volunteered for this duty in order to fill in his political resume or to obtain a photo-op. No one volunteered for this duty to serve less than honorably.

It is very difficult to reconstruct a firefight immediately afterward. Now we are trying to analyze one that took place 35 years ago. I find it ironic our last two presidents deliberately avoided military service in Vietnam. Now we have a presidential candidate who did serve in combat and we are debating how honorably. John Kerry served ”on the river.” That alone has earned my respect.

The Vietnam War was divisive enough. Thirty-five years later, those of us who served there should not continue this divisiveness. Many Americans at the time did not salute the war or those who fought it. Maybe now it is time to salute one who was there.

Joseph T. Petro

Ralph Sierra: ‘A friend has been following news reports about the Swift Boat controversy pretty closely, and says that most of them leave the impression that Kerry was only in Vietnam for four months – got wounded, and then got sent home. This feeds the Republican line that he ‘cut and run.’ She hopes the Kerry people starting talking more about the fact that he had ALREADY served a 12 month tour, prior to the one in which he got wounded.’

And now . . .

OH, WHAT THE HECK – LET’S HEAR FROM SOMEONE WHO WAS THERE

An account you may have missed:

Aug. 21, 2004, 4:46PM
Rood: Anti-Kerry vets not there that day
By WILLIAM B. ROOD
Chicago Tribune

There were three swift boats on the river that day in Vietnam more than 35 years ago — three officers and 15 crew members. Only two of those officers remain to talk about what happened on February 28, 1969.

One is John Kerry, the Democratic presidential candidate who won a Silver Star for what happened on that date. I am the other.

For years, no one asked about those events. But now they are the focus of skirmishing in a presidential election with a group of swift boat veterans and others contending that Kerry didn’t deserve the Silver Star for what he did on that day, or the Bronze Star and three Purple Hearts he was awarded for other actions.

Many of us wanted to put it all behind us — the rivers, the ambushes, the killing. Ever since that time, I have refused all requests for interviews about Kerry’s service — even those from reporters at the Chicago Tribune, where I work.

But Kerry’s critics, armed with stories I know to be untrue, have charged that the accounts of what happened were overblown. The critics have taken pains to say they’re not trying to cast doubts on the merit of what others did, but their version of events has splashed doubt on all of us. It’s gotten harder and harder for those of us who were there to listen to accounts we know to be untrue, especially when they come from people who were not there.

Even though Kerry’s own crew members have backed him, the attacks have continued, and in recent days Kerry has called me and others who were with him in those days, asking that we go public with our accounts.

I can’t pretend those calls had no effect on me, but that is not why I am writing this. What matters most to me is that this is hurting crewmen who are not public figures and who deserved to be honored for what they did. My intent is to tell the story here and to never again talk publicly about it.

I was part of the operation that led to Kerry’s Silver Star. I have no firsthand knowledge of the events that resulted in his winning the Purple Hearts or the Bronze Star.

But on Feb. 28, 1969, I was officer in charge of PCF-23, one of three swift boats — including Kerry’s PCF-94 and Lt. j.g. Donald Droz’s PCF-43 — that carried Vietnamese regional and Popular Force troops and a Navy demolition team up the Dong Cung, a narrow tributary of the Bay Hap River, to conduct a sweep in the area.

The approach of the noisy 50-foot aluminum boats, each driven by two huge 12-cylinder diesels and loaded down with six crew members, troops and gear, was no secret.

Ambushes were a virtual certainty, and that day was no exception.

The difference was that Kerry, who had tactical command of that particular operation, had talked to Droz and me beforehand about not responding the way the boats usually did to an ambush.

We agreed that if we were not crippled by the initial volley and had a clear fix on the location of the ambush, we would turn directly into it, focusing the boats’ twin .50-caliber machine guns on the attackers and beaching the boats. We told our crews about the plan.

The Viet Cong in the area had come to expect that the heavily loaded boats would lumber on past an ambush, firing at the entrenched attackers, beaching upstream and putting troops ashore to sweep back down on the ambush site. Often, they were long gone by the time the troops got there.

The first time we took fire — the usual rockets and automatic weapons — Kerry ordered a “turn 90” and the three boats roared in on the ambush. It worked. We routed the ambush, killing three of the attackers. The troops, led by an Army adviser, jumped off the boats and began a sweep, which killed another half dozen VC, wounded or captured others and found weapons, blast masks and other supplies used to stage ambushes.

Meanwhile, Kerry ordered our boat to head upstream with his, leaving Droz’s boat at the first site.

It happened again, another ambush. And again, Kerry ordered the turn maneuver, and again it worked. As we headed for the riverbank, I remember seeing a loaded B-40 launcher pointed at the boats. It wasn’t fired as two men jumped up from their spider holes.

We called Droz’s boat up to assist us, and Kerry, followed by one member of his crew, jumped ashore and chased a VC behind a hooch — a thatched hut — maybe 15 yards inland from the ambush site. Some who were there that day recall the man being wounded as he ran. Neither I nor Jerry Leeds, our boat’s leading petty officer with whom I’ve checked my recollection of all these events, recalls that, which is no surprise. Recollections of those who go through experiences like that frequently differ.

With our troops involved in the sweep of the first ambush site, Richard Lamberson, a member of my crew, and I also went ashore to search the area. I was checking out the inside of the hooch when I heard gunfire nearby.

Not long after that, Kerry returned, reporting that he had killed the man he chased behind the hooch. He also had picked up a loaded B-40 rocket launcher, which we took back to our base in An Thoi after the operation.

John O’Neill, author of a highly critical account of Kerry’s Vietnam service, describes the man Kerry chased as a “teenager” in a “loincloth.” I have no idea how old the gunner Kerry chased that day was, but both Leeds and I recall that he was a grown man, dressed in the kind of garb the VC usually wore.

The man Kerry chased was not the “lone” attacker at that site, as O’Neill suggests. There were others who fled. There was also firing from the tree line well behind the spider holes and at one point, from the opposite riverbank as well. It was not the work of just one attacker.

Our initial reports of the day’s action caused an immediate response from our task force headquarters in Cam Ranh Bay.

Known over radio circuits by the call sign “Latch,” then-Capt. and now retired Rear Adm. Roy Hoffmann, the task force commander, fired off a message congratulating the three swift boats, saying at one point that the tactic of charging the ambushes was a “shining example of completely overwhelming the enemy” and that it “may be the most efficacious method of dealing with small numbers of ambushers.”

Hoffmann has become a leading critic of Kerry’s and now says that what the boats did on that day demonstrated Kerry’s inclination to be impulsive to a fault.

Our decision to use that tactic under the right circumstances was not impulsive but was the result of discussions well beforehand and a mutual agreement of all three boat officers.

It was also well within the aggressive tradition that was embraced by the late Adm. Elmo Zumwalt, then commander of U.S. Naval Forces, Vietnam. Months before that day in February, a fellow boat officer, Michael Bernique, was summoned to Saigon to explain to top Navy commanders why he had made an unauthorized run up the Giang Thanh River, which runs along the Vietnam-Cambodia border. Bernique, who speaks French fluently, had been told by a source in Ha Tien at the mouth of the river that a VC tax collector was operating upstream.

Ignoring the prohibition against it, Bernique and his crew went upstream and routed the VC, pursuing and killing several.

Instead of facing disciplinary action as he had expected, Bernique was given the Silver Star, and Zumwalt ordered other swifts, which had largely patrolled coastal waters, into the rivers.

The decision sent a clear message, underscored repeatedly by Hoffmann’s congratulatory messages, that aggressive patrolling was expected and that well-timed, if unconventional, tactics like Bernique’s were encouraged.

What we did on Feb. 28, 1969, was well in line with the tone set by our top commanders.

Zumwalt made that clear when he flew down to our base at An Thoi off the southern tip of Vietnam to pin the Silver Star on Kerry and assorted Bronze Stars and commendation medals on the rest of us.

My Bronze Star citation, signed by Zumwalt, praised the charge tactic we used that day, saying the VC were “caught completely off guard.”

There’s at least one mistake in that citation. It incorrectly identifies the river where the main action occurred, a reminder that such documents were often done in haste and sometimes authored for their signers by staffers. It’s a cautionary note for those trying to piece it all together. There’s no final authority on something that happened so long ago — not the documents and not even the strained recollections of those of us who were there.

But I know that what some people are saying now is wrong. While they mean to hurt Kerry, what they’re saying impugns others who are not in the public eye. . .

William B. Rood is an editor at the Chicago Tribune.

☞ I’d give a nickel to know what George W. Bush was doing on February 28, 1969? But leaving that aside, does it actually matter what the truth is? Not to talk show hosts like Sean Hannity:

Doug Jones: ‘While driving home from a long trip last Thursday (Aug 19), about the only thing I could hear on the radio was Sean Hannity. Please note that the 19th is well after Senator McCain denounced the anti-Kerry swift boat attack ads. Hannity was going on and on ad nauseum about how Kerry is scared to talk about his war record because Kerry’s war record is a pack of lies as demonstrated by those ads. No mention was made anywhere about Senator McCain’s statement [or any of the other things that had come out]. I know several otherwise sane and rational people who listen to Hannity on a daily basis, and who believe that he is more truthful than the newspaper or television news.’

SO . . . HAS THE PRESIDENT NO SHAME?

From the blog of David Weinberger:

August 21, 2004

This Swift boat attack is a predictable Karl Rove smear. Here’s what I want
Kerry to say, not that anyone asked:

At long last, we have to ask: Mr. President, have you no shame?

You said you looked forward to a campaign on the issues, one based on mutual respect. And yet some of your largest supporters are sponsoring an unrelenting campaign of mudslinging, attacking my record in the service.

The connections between your campaign and these outrageous attacks are close and documented. So, stop your flip-flopping. Don’t say you want a clean campaign and then turn your back as mud is thrown in your name.

The other day, a man at one of your carefully controlled town hall events said, “We’ve got a candidate for President out here with two self-inflicted scratches, and I take that as an insult.” And how did you reply? Did you do the decent thing? Did you try to quiet the applause? Did you tell him that you’d have no part in such accusations against a man who put on a uniform and put himself in harm’s way to serve his country, like millions of other veterans? No, here’s what you said: “Well, I appreciate that. Thank you.” Thank you? Mr. President, where is your common decency?

These trumped up, false attacks on my war record and my character are distractions from the real issues that face America. You did this to [John McCain and to] my friend and great patriot, Max Cleland, who left three limbs in Vietnam. Now you are doing it to me. Your pattern is clear: You can’t campaign on the issues so you attack veterans, people who when they were needed showed up and did their duty. In the name of respect for those of us who did our service and in the name of the American people who face issues that will shape our destiny, I call on you to make good on your word and denounce these attacks.

David Weinberger

Okay. Grant our Republican friends in Texas this much: they don’t mince words and they believe what they believe (as they are entitled to).

Still, wait until you read this. And remember that one of the two guys running for President actually is a Republican from Texas.

But first . . . I had this slated to run last week and it got bumped and now you all know it – but I want to run it anyway.

From Thursday’s Washington Post, by staff writer Michael Dobbs:

Newly obtained military records of one of Sen. John F. Kerry’s most vocal critics, who has accused the Democratic presidential candidate of lying about his wartime record to win medals, contradict his own version of events.

In newspaper interviews and a best-selling book, Larry Thurlow, who commanded a Navy Swift boat alongside Kerry in Vietnam, has strongly disputed Kerry’s claim that the Massachusetts Democrat’s boat came under fire during a mission in Viet Cong-controlled territory on March 13, 1969. Kerry won a Bronze Star for his actions that day.

But Thurlow’s military records, portions of which were released yesterday to The Washington Post under the Freedom of Information Act, contain several references to “enemy small arms and automatic weapons fire” directed at “all units” of the five-boat flotilla. Thurlow won his own Bronze Star that day, and the citation praises him for providing assistance to a damaged Swift boat “despite enemy bullets flying about him.”

☞ So all the guys who actually served on the boat with him vouch for John Kerry . . . and the guy whose life he saved remembers it vividly (as how could he not?) . . . but we are to believe Larry Thurlow, that actually no one was being fired on that day and nothing heroic happened? Or that the Viet Cong had chosen to fire at all the boats except John Kerry’s?

Where have we come to in this country when people would not just look at the facts and conclude, as Senator John McCain has, that these charges are ‘dishonest and dishonorable’ and just move on from there?

Where have we come to when a guy who did all he could to avoid service in Vietnam, and seems to have skipped a good chunk of his service altogether refuses to disavow a campaign to assassinate the character of a man who volunteered for the front lines?

Or maybe Andy Borowitz has it right. Maybe – if John Kerry actually went to Vietnam at all – he only did so to avoid serving in the Alabama Nation Guard . . .

August 12, 2004
GOP: KERRY WENT TO VIETNAM TO AVOID
SERVING IN ALABAMA NATIONAL GUARD

Guard-Dodging Charges Haunt Campaign

A new Republican-financed negative ad is accusing Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry of fleeing to Vietnam to avoid serving in the Alabama National Guard.

The ad, airing in most of the so-called battleground states, attempts to contrast Sen. Kerry’s alleged guard-dodging with the storied Alabama National Guard heroism of the Republican nominee, President George W. Bush.

In the ad, a narrator asks, ‘When the Alabama National Guard called young Americans to serve, where was John Kerry? Thousands of miles away, in Vietnam.’

Okay . . . at last . . . finally . . .

DON’T MESS WITH TEXAS

These are excerpts from the 2004 Texas Republican Party Platform:

The Republican Party of Texas affirms that the United States of America is a Christian nation, and the public acknowledgement of God is undeniable in our history. Our nation was founded on fundamental Judeo-Christian principles based on the Holy Bible. The Party affirms freedom of religion, and rejects efforts of courts and secular activists who seek to remove and deny such a rich heritage from our public lives.

Early Childhood Development -The Party believes that parents are best suited to train their children in their early development years (ages 0 through 5) and opposes mandatory pre-school and Kindergarten. The Party urges Congress to repeal government-sponsored programs that deal with early childhood development, and phase them out as soon as possible.

Classroom Discipline – We urge the Texas Legislature, Governor, Commissioner of Education and State Board of Education to remind administrators and school boards that corporal punishment is effective and legal in Texas.

Party believes theories of life origins and environmental theories should be taught only as theories not fact; that social studies and other curriculum should not be based on any one theory.

We call on the Legislature to end all state funding of higher educations grants and scholarships.

The Party believes it is in the best interest of the citizens of the United States that we immediately rescind our membership in, as well as all financial and military contributions to, the United Nations.

We believe that human life is sacred, created in the image of God. Life begins at the moment of fertilization and ends at the point of natural death. All innocent human life must be protected.

We oppose the Endangered Species Act.

The Party calls for restoration of the plaques honoring the Confederate Widow’s Pension Fund contribution that were illegally removed from the Texas Supreme Court and other state buildings.

The Party calls upon the Texas Legislature and the United States Congress to repeal any and all laws that infringe upon the right of individual citizens to keep and bear arms as guaranteed by the 2nd Amendment to the United States Constitution; and to reject the establishment of any mechanism to process, license, record, register or monitor the ownership of guns.

Our Party pledges to exert its influence to restore the original intent of the First Amendment of the United States Constitution and dispel the myth of the separation of Church and State.

We also deplore forced sensitivity training and urge the repeal of laws and mandates requiring such training. We believe the Hate Crimes Law is unnecessary, and that it unconstitutionally creates a special class of victims. We urge that it be repealed immediately.

We oppose the recognition of and granting of benefits to people who represent themselves as domestic partners without being legally married.

No fault divorce laws have caused untold hardships on American families, by reducing their standard of living, and by harming the emotional and physical well-being of children. It has contributed to an increase in government assistance of all kinds. We call upon the Texas Legislature to rescind no-fault divorce laws.

Homosexuality – The Party believes that the practice of sodomy tears at the fabric of society, contributes to the breakdown of the family unit, and leads to the spread of dangerous, communicable diseases. Homosexual behavior is contrary to the fundamental, unchanging truths that have been ordained by God, recognized by our country’s founders, and shared by the majority of Texans. Homosexuality must not be presented as an acceptable “alternative” lifestyle in our public education and policy, nor should “family” be redefined to include homosexual “couples.” We are opposed to any granting of special legal entitlements, recognition, or privileges including, but not limited to, marriage between persons of the same sex, custody of children by homosexuals, homosexual partner insurance or retirement benefits. We oppose any criminal or civil penalties against those who oppose homosexuality out of faith, conviction, or belief in traditional values.

The Party supports legislation prohibiting experimentation with human fetal tissue and prohibiting the use of human fetal tissue or organs for experimentation or commercial sale. Until such time that fetal tissue harvesting is illegal, any product containing fetal tissue shall be so labeled.

Stem Cell Research – We commend the President for banning the government funding of human embryo stem cell harvesting and call upon the US Congress to pass legislation supporting the President. The Party opposes any legislation that would allow for the destruction of human embryos for medical research.

The Party believes that commercial surrogacy is a legal and ethical free-fall and the rental of a woman’s womb makes child bearing a mere commodity to the highest bidder.

Behavior has personal and social consequences. We call upon the United States Public Health Service and all states to declare HIV a “dangerous, yet preventable, infectious, communicable disease.”

The Party supports amendment of the Americans with Disabilities Act to exclude from its definition those persons with infectious diseases, substance addiction, learning disabilities, behavior disorders, homosexual practices and mental stress, thereby reducing abuse of the Act.

On a lighter note . . . here’s a great column that explains Instant Messaging, Text Messaging, and Skype (I had never even heard of Skype).