brigade-l Thursday, October 26 2000 Volume 01 : Number 115 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 11:13:08 -0400 From: "Linda Muller" Subject: [BRIGADE] What Does "Pro-Life" Really Mean? - Granny Brigade: RNC Fax Note Dear Brigade, See email below from Mary Ward and Betty Lanfer (the Granny Brigade). Also see their "Blue Book on G.W. Bush" - http://www.buchananreform.com/trail/trailemporium.asp - I put it into Adobe Acrobat format for easy printing and distribution. FTC-Linda - ---------- Date sent: Sun, 22 Oct 2000 18:04:35 -0500 From: granny_brigade@hotmail.com To: Linda@Buchanan.org Subject: RNCFax Notes,10-20-00 After sending out a fax October 9 praising Patrick J. Buchanan for his pro-life position and criticizing George W. Bush's weakness on the issue, The Republican National Coalition for Life has done an about face and issued a fax which for all intents and purposes ends up being an endorsement of George W. Bush, under the guise of "informing your conscience." And how was the life issue treated at the convention of compassionate conservatives in Philadelphia? So far as anyone looking on could tell, it was a non-issue. This was the convention that nominated the man who "says he wants to lead the country toward a Culture of Life." (RNCfor Life Fax Notes 10-20-00) But the unborn babies didn't earn a word of support from him. How will Mr. Bush lead us toward this culture of life? Will he promote and support an end to abortion? Will he stop the fetal tissue trafficking, human embryo experimentation, genetic manipulation, the human genome project, etc.? Will it be by his choice of judges? He has already told us he has no litmus test. In fact, one of his appointees to the Texas Supreme Court said he wasn't asked any questions before his appointment. What federal highway will he name after an abortionist? Will he name Martha Hill Jamison to the U.S. Supreme Court? During the debate, "Bush's response to the RU-486 question showed that he is not willing to use the powers of the President to advance the pro-life cause or to change policy in any meaningful way."(RNC) Will he handle this by wringing his hands since he seems to have no answer? Will his concern for life carry into his foreign policy too. He has already indicated, as has his Vice-Presidential candidate, that he is willing to send American men and women to other lands if he discovers it is in our "national interest" to do so? Will it be your sons and daughters and grandchildren? Both men readily confirmed this possibility in their debates. Will he send his own daughters out to be in the front lines? After all, he believes women belong there. One has to wonder about his respect for life when he scolded Clinton for not being "ferocious" enough in Kosovo to send 200,000 American troops in so more people could be slaughtered. This was the war Pope John Paul so strongly opposed. No one can dispute Father Pavone's statement that "we may morally vote for a less perfect candidate who is actually electable at the present moment, rather than a better candidate who does not have the base of support to actually get into office." Fine, if that's where one's conscience leads one. However, he steps over the line when he suggests that a vote for a third party is merely "making a statement." He says our vote is our way of participating in "moving society forward, rather than a forum for ‘making statements.'" Isn't it the polling place where we express satisfaction or dissatisfaction with society as it is represented by our government? This is an insult to anyone who cannot in conscience vote for the "less than perfect candidate who is electable.." With the entourage he has surrounding him, we fail to see how this "less than perfect candidate" can possibly "move our society forward." Father Pavone's statement is hardly unbiased as he proclaimed George W. Bush to be pro-life in the pages of the June 11-17, 2000 issue of The National Catholic Register, which for all intents and purposes constitutes an endorsement of the man. We are sorry Father has been so misinformed. Evangelium Vitae: "It is impossible to further the common good without acknowledging and defending the right to life, upon which all other inalienable rights of individuals are founded and from which they develop." When did the candidate in question ever "defend" the right to life? The far "less than perfect candidate" may be acceptable to some, but we'll take our advice from a higher authority, St. Thomas Aquinas, and vote our consciences - for the true champion of the unborn, Patrick J. Buchanan. One thing that seems to escape Father Pavone is the fact that God has sent us a candidate who is not only an upstanding Catholic but an outstanding defender of the unborn, something the "less than perfect candidate" has never been and never will be. And one day, for our failure to recognize this gift, a terrible price will be paid. Father Pavone's opinion is simply that: his opinion. And there is another opinion, written also by a priest: "It is time for the pulpits of America to ring loud with the call for all men to defend the unborn. The only candidate completely committed to defending the defenseless is Patrick Buchanan. This makes the choice for Catholics a logical one: A Catholic cannot vote for any politician who supports abortion: George W. Bush & Al Gore support abortion: thus, Catholics cannot vote for them." It all depends on what you believe being pro-life actually means. Mary Ward Betty Lanfer - ------ end ---------- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ On the Trail.... with Pat Buchanan and Ezola Foster http://www.buchananreform.com/trail/trailmain.asp ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Internet Brigade Headquarters http://www.buchanan.org ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ BUCHANAN-FOSTER 2000 HQ 1-800-GO-PAT-GO http://www.buchananreform.com ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 14:04:13 -0400 From: "Linda Muller" Subject: [BRIGADE] Yellow Fever Infects Pro-Lifers Dear Brigade, "Either way, one thing is perfectly clear. Yellow Fever has already infected far too many people, who now call themselves pro-life either to win votes or dollars. And what do I mean by Yellow Fever, you might ask? Well, using Webster's definition of "yellow," I mean cowardly, timid, gutless, craven statements, uttered by people who will sell out the truth for a crumb from the political power-brokers' tables in the temple!..." Brigade, Judie Brown slams in a triple home run with this one! BTW, have you ever wondered what GW really stands for? [G]utless [W]onder !! FTC-Linda PS -- You can check out Judie Browns website at: American Life League: http://www.all.org or email herat : jbrown@all.org. - --------- Tuesday, October 24, 2000 George Bush Not Pro-Life Says American Life League by: Judie Brown American Life League News Recent events have a meaning that cannot escape an educated observer. The fact is, the term "pro-life," as is currently being used in preparation for the 2000 elections, means virtually nothing at all. In fact, I dare say, a big-name Republican can call himself "pro-life" and be assured of plaudits from certain quarters, even if he would never act on any measure designed to stop the senseless slaughter at all! How could we possibly come this sad state of affairs so early the cycle? Aren't there more than 19 months before the first American will have to cast a vote? Well, take a look at Governor George W. Bush, for example. He said if "America's heart" were right, he would support an amendment to the Constitution of the United States that only allowed the commission of abortion on children conceived in rape or incest or allegedly posing a threat to their own mother. But, he would only embrace such a corrupt position if "America's heart" were right! The National Right to Life Committee immediately instructed the nation that George's position was fine with them. And the NRLC has warned people like me not to pick on poor Georgie, but rather leave him alone and focus our attention on Al Gore. To that notion, I say-get a grip! No one in a leadership role in the pro-life movement should allow a man who panders to polls to get away with describing himself as pro-life, while embracing the killing of any embryonic or fetal child. George W. Bush is NOT pro-life! And while we are examining the state of moral principle in our movement, let us not overlook the fact that Pat Robertson's Christian Coalition is on the bandwagon with National Right to Life. The Republicans for Life Political Action Committee is also supporting NRLC. (This PAC should not be confused with Republican National Coalition for Life, which has soundly denounced George W.'s false description of himself as pro-life.) Why this sudden quest to embrace George W.? Why not focus our attention on the truth that there are people in America who do understand that every human being is created by God and only He can determine their fate? Or do some really and truly believe that incrementalism has crept into the commandment that reads, "Thou shalt not kill"? Or maybe they think that when one dabbles in politics, God has authored a separate set of rules! Or maybe Ronald Reagan's old rule, "thou shalt not talk about thy fellow Republicans" actually could read "and thou shalt not take a position of moral leadership and expect to win an election." Either way, one thing is perfectly clear. Yellow Fever has already infected far too many people, who now call themselves pro-life either to win votes or dollars. And what do I mean by Yellow Fever, you might ask? Well, using Webster's definition of "yellow," I mean cowardly, timid, gutless, craven statements, uttered by people who will sell out the truth for a crumb from the political power-brokers' tables in the temple! Enough is enough. I don't know about anyone else in the pro- life movement, but please, National Life to Right Committee, don't insult my 30 years of active involvement in this effort! Please don't make any more statements of recrimination toward those of us who see a child, know it's a child, and thank God for the privilege of battling to save the child -every child! - --------- end -------- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ On the Trail.... with Pat Buchanan and Ezola Foster http://www.buchananreform.com/trail/trailmain.asp ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Internet Brigade Headquarters http://www.buchanan.org ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ BUCHANAN-FOSTER 2000 HQ 1-800-GO-PAT-GO http://www.buchananreform.com ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 14:32:28 -0400 From: "Linda Muller" Subject: [BRIGADE] Catholic Answers - Call In From: DeBackerD@aol.com Date sent: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 14:20:04 EDT Subject: Re: [BRIGADE] What Does "Pro-Life" Really Mean? - Granny Brigade: RNC Fax Note To: linda@buchanan.org Linda, Father Pavone will be on Catholic Answers. It is a live show on at 3pm pacific time, today Wed the 24th on almost all Catholic Radio stations It can be heard live on www.catholic.com and the call in number is 1-888-31-truth PS -- They had Novak on there before pushing Bush. Novak even said that it was unimportant in elections for city council and other small offices to bother to vote pro life, but federal elections are important. Boy did he get an argument from me. After that I quit giving to them. In addition Karl Keating their founder denied the existance of any New World Order plans on one show. Unfortunately, It is becoming a popular show with Catholics. - --------- end ------- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ On the Trail.... with Pat Buchanan and Ezola Foster http://www.buchananreform.com/trail/trailmain.asp ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Internet Brigade Headquarters http://www.buchanan.org ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ BUCHANAN-FOSTER 2000 HQ 1-800-GO-PAT-GO http://www.buchananreform.com ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 14:48:55 -0400 From: "Linda Muller" Subject: [BRIGADE] PJB: GOP Caves On Abortion For Immediate Release Wednesday, October 25, 2000 Contact Brian Doherty or Rick Mangus (703) 734-2700 BUCHANAN: GOP CAVES ON ABORTION AID SAN FRANCISCO, CA – Today, Reform Presidential candidate Pat Buchanan released the following statement: “Yesterday, the Republican Congress followed George W. Bush in an abject retreat from the cause of the unborn. In budget talks with the Clinton Administration, Republican negotiators dropped the party’s long-standing opposition to the use of federal funds to promote abortion as a method of ‘family planning’ in foreign countries. “The GOP’s surrender matches George W. Bush’s weak stance. In recent weeks, Bush has caved in on refused to RU 486, the baby-killing drug manufactured in Communist China, recently approved for American use by the Clinton administration. “Viewing Bush’s waffling, pro-life activists like Judie Brown of the American Life League now say bluntly that ‘George W. Bush is NOT pro-life.’ Yesterday’s shameful capitulation in Congress indicates that not only Bush but much of the GOP leadership is walking away from the struggle to save the unborn.” - ----30---- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ On the Trail.... with Pat Buchanan and Ezola Foster http://www.buchananreform.com/trail/trailmain.asp ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Internet Brigade Headquarters http://www.buchanan.org ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ BUCHANAN-FOSTER 2000 HQ 1-800-GO-PAT-GO http://www.buchananreform.com ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 14:58:15 -0400 From: "Linda Muller" Subject: [BRIGADE] Jewish Court Excommunicates Lieberman Dear Brigade, "Rabbi Joseph Friedman, a spokesman for the rabbinical court, said in a statement that Lieberman has "flagrantly violated our sacred Torah by his Senate votes upholding partial birth infanticide and legitimizing homosexuality, which abnormal and unhealthy behavior the Torah strongly condemns as sinful and immoral....." Boy, isn't it wonderful when people stand up for truth! FTC-Linda - -------- From: "Jonathan Hill" Subject: Jewish Court Excommunicates Lieberman Date sent: Tue, 24 Oct 2000 10:33:29 -0400 NewsMax.com Jewish Court Excommunicates Lieberman CNSNews.com Tuesday, Oct. 24, 2000 A rabbinical court in Brooklyn, N.Y., has taken the unusual step of excommunicating Sen. Joseph Lieberman of Connecticut, the Democrat vice presidential nominee. The New York Torah Court stated that he caused grave scandal for the Jewish religion because "while claiming to be an observant Jew, Lieberman has been misrepresenting and falsifying to the American people the teachings of the Torah against partial birth infanticide, against special privileges and preferential treatment for flaunting homosexuals, and against religious intermarriage of Jews." Rabbi Joseph Friedman, a spokesman for the rabbinical court, said in a statement that Lieberman has "flagrantly violated our sacred Torah by his Senate votes upholding partial birth infanticide and legitimizing homosexuality, which abnormal and unhealthy behavior the Torah strongly condemns as sinful and immoral." "Mr. Lieberman, moreover, has, in violation of the Torah, supported harmful gender integration in the U.S. Armed Forces – in the barracks, on naval warships, and in combat training – all of which weakens and demoralizes our armed forces," he added. Friedman stated that there were historical precedents for rabbinical excommunication of public figures as well as private individuals. However, those precedents have been few and far between. In 1945, Rabbi Mordecai M. Kaplan was excommunicated for grave violations of the Torah. That excommunication was reported in the New York Times and other newspapers and publications. Friedman was traveling abroad Monday and not available for comment. A beth din is composed of three Talmudists who may convene to consider sanctions when there is a question about how a person has conducted himself in regard to Jewish teachings. Decisions from a beth din are not based on secular law, but rather the interpretation of Jewish teachings. A beth din, which means "house of judgment,'' may consider matters including divorce, financial disputes and other questions of Jewish law. "In former times, when there was more of an organized hierarchy, there were different cities that would have their own beth din," said Rabbi Yehuda Levin of New York, who estimated the beth din''s ruling represents "tens of thousands of Jews in Brooklyn and other parts of the country," and perhaps as many as 150,000 Orthodox Jews. "There are special issues where rabbis get together and convene a beth din," said Levin, who was not one of the three rabbis convening the New York beth din. "This would be more of the kind that was convened for this purpose." Levin is a spokesman for the group Jews for Morality, which has been critical of Lieberman and some of his policies as they relate to Orthodox Judaism. The Gore-Lieberman 2000 Campaign Headquarters' press office in Nashville had no immediate response to the excommunication. 'Very Uncommon' "Excommunication is very uncommon," said Levin. "While it's not an everyday occurrence, it certainly does happen that a beth din will find that a person is in a state of disfavor in the Jewish community." Although the decision represents the opinion of the rabbis who convened the beth din and the Jews they speak for, it does not necessarily mean Lieberman will be unwelcome in other Orthodox Jewish synagogues. Not all Orthodox Jews concur with the ruling by the New York beth din. Rabbi Gavriel Cohen, who serves on the rabbinical court in Los Angeles, said he felt the decision was too harsh. "It''s overdoing it a little bit," said Cohen, who suggested Lieberman stick to politics and not delve into matters of faith. "He''s a nice person, but he should not answer religious questions." Cohen agreed that excommunication was rare among Jews, citing a recent action by a beth din in Israel as something that may have provided some of the impetus for the New York beth din's move. "It''s not common, it's something that just happened in Israel about three or four weeks ago, and it's still in the air," said Cohen. But others thought the New York beth din decision was appropriate. "Joe Lieberman has brought this excommunication upon himself by flatly trying to say that orthodoxy is one way when orthodoxy is the opposite direction of what he said it was," said the Rev. Lou Sheldon with the Christian lobbying group Traditional Values Coalition. "The partial-birth abortion issue is a bread-and-butter, life-or- death issue to Orthodox Jews," said Sheldon. "Creation and procreation are vital to the Orthodox Jewish belief system." Copyright CNSNews.com Taken from: http://www.newsmax.com/ articles/print.shtml?a=2000/10/23/165511.txt - --------- end --------- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ On the Trail.... with Pat Buchanan and Ezola Foster http://www.buchananreform.com/trail/trailmain.asp ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Internet Brigade Headquarters http://www.buchanan.org ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ BUCHANAN-FOSTER 2000 HQ 1-800-GO-PAT-GO http://www.buchananreform.com ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 18:33:40 -0400 From: "Linda Muller" Subject: [BRIGADE] HOT! Top 50 Reasons to LOVE Pat! Dear Brigade, I agree with Peter! Send me YOUR top 5; 10; or ? reasons on why you love Pat. I'll post them on our site! PS -- You can send in several reasons, but keep each one brief and remember to include your name-city-state. And, make sure you put "My Reasons to Love Pat" in the "subject" line of your email -- otherwise I might never see it! FTC-Linda - ------------- From: PeteDuj@aol.com Date sent: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 17:53:26 EDT Subject: TOP 50 REASONS TO LOVE PAT To: Hi Linda, Here is a list I came up with on why I love Pat. Feel free to send out. Maybe others can add their own reasons! Peter Dujardin PS: You do a great job. TOP 50 REASONS TO LOVE PAT BUCHANAN 1) For saying that his first act as president, as chief law enforcement officer of the United States, would be to turn to Bill Clinton and say, "Sir, you have the right to remain silent." 2) For his quote in 1992 that, "America has to start standing up to these environmental extremists, who put birds and rats and insects ahead of families, workers and jobs." 3) For his ability to articulate without fear the utter misdirection of American foreign policy toward Israel and Palestine, even though he knows that the media will maliciously mischaracterize him. 4) For his calling New York Times big shot Bill Safire "not an honorable man" when his former friend and fellow Nixon speech writer accused Pat of being an anti-Semite. Said Pat: "He puts the interest of Israel ahead of the interests of his own country." 4) For his heartrending description in his autobiography, Right >From the Beginning, about his brother Bill's death. 5) For his infectious and easy laugh. 6) For Shelley, and Pat's loving introduction of her everytime he speaks. 7) For his sense of history, incorporating the ideas of the Founding Fathers into almost every speech, and invoking such things as George Washington's warnings against "passionate attachments" and "inveterate antipathies" toward certain foreign countries. Doing so, ole George warned, can lead to bad foreign policy. 8) For his quote in 1996 that, "I must tell the leaders of my party in all sincerity: The day my party walks away from the innocent unborn -- that day it ceases to be my party." 9) For his class act in handling callers on talk shows who disagree with him, never resorting to pettiness and anger, always listening to them and trying to address their questions directly. 10) For his devout faith. 11) For his coining of the term "conservatives of the heart" to describe forgotten lower-middle class Americans who work hard and play by the rules. "They don't read Adam Smith or Edmund Burke. But they come from the same schoolyards and playgrounds and towns that we came from. They share our beliefs and our convictions, our hopes and our dreams." 12) For quoting freely from the Bible, such as referring to his loyalists as "Gideon's Army," who are "marching to Armageddon to do battle for the Lord." Someday, Pat said, "The stone the builders rejected, shall become the cornerstone." 13) For his ability to use the semicolon in his writing. 14) For his unparalled speaking style, being simply the best speaker in American politics, with cadences that range from slow and low to fast and furious. 15) For getting into a fight with the cops while he was at Georgetown; Pat has never backed away. 16) For his wit. 17) For his quote in 1992, citing a study that showed Al Gore beat out Teddy Kennedy three straight years as the biggest spender in the Senate. "And Teddy Kennedy isn't moderate about anything. I'm not kidding about Teddy. How many other 60-year-olds do you know who still go to Florida for Spring Break?" 18) For animatedly defending his book, A Republic, Not an Empire, from malicious attacks that took the book remarkably out of context. 19) For being warm and sincere in person, with a firm handshake and a look in the eye. 20) For coining the term, "Peasants with Pitchforks!" in the 1996 campaign. "They're pulling up the drawbridge, but we're going in with our pitchforks after them!" 21) For saying in a 1996 speech, after reporters kept asking him when he was going to give up. "They keep asking when we're going to stop fighting. I said, 'We're not going to stop fighting 'till hell freezes over! Then we're gonna fight on the ice!' " 22) For continuing to persevere and fight in 2000 despite three a gall bladder operations and Perot-financed opposition. 23) For his maintenance of a positive outlook throughout, despite recent poll numbers. Instead of dwelling on his low standing, he calls the campaign a "golden opportunity" to express our views. 24) For not sucking up and selling out to the Republican Establishment, as Rush Limbaugh, Bill Bennett and George F. Will, et al, have. 25) For his response when a gay activist at Harvard's Kennedy School of Government asked him out on a date: "I'll have to ask Shelley...Shelley, would it be okay if I went out with him?" (Shelley throws up her hands). "She said she didn't care!" The exchange had the audience in stitches and turned a potentially volatile situation into a positive. 26) For his cat Gipper. 27) For being unafraid to speak out against affirmative action, as both unfair to whites and insulting to blacks. 28) For quoting Dante in a 1995 speech at a pro-life rally in New Hampshire. "They tell us we should remain silent. But in the immortal words of Dante, 'There is a special place in hell for those who remain silent.' And we shall not remain silent." 29) For his view of politics that it should be viewed as a form of intellectual combat rather than a chance to show how kind you are. 30) For defending Bob Jones University. 31) For his meatball ad. 32) For trading in his Mercedes for an American car after it became an issue in the 1992 campaign. 33) For his hilarious stories in Right from the Beginning about growing up. Take this moral dilemma: his brother had just thrown beer bottles at his girlfriend's house after he, his brother and some friends had driven over there; the girl's father was inside. "For a split second, I was frozen with panic. Either I could do the honorable thing and continue to the front door, face an enranged Dr. Richwine, apologize for the smashed glass and the dent in his door, and take my medicine, or I could do the cowardly thing and run and hope he didn't get the make of the car. By the time I got into the driver's seat, everybody had piled in; and the swiftness of the departure of the black and white olds made me think we had gotten away. I was wrong." 34) For saying that he would kick the United Nations out of the United States. And if Kofi Annon, the U.S. Secretary General, refused to leave, "We'll send a few thousand U.S. Marines to help him pack!" 35) For saying in a 1996 speech. "America is more than her gross national product. She is more than the world's largest economy. She is more than the sum of all we buy and sell. She is our country and our home. We are not just consumers. We are citizens of a great republic, sons and daughters of a great nation. And we have duties and obligations to one another." 36) For saying he regrets not having adopted a child when he was younger. 37) For being the only candidate with the courage to stand up against sanctions against Iraq that by some estimates have killed 500,000 children since 1991. "When did the greatest republic on earth start waging war on children?" 38) For saying that the black civil rights activists of the 1960's, although he disagreed with some of their tactics, were right and had morality on their side. 39) For his memory. 40) For his ability to speak forcefully and intelligently in an off the cuff manner, particularly in question and answer sessions after speeches. 41) For his arguments that a third party is needed "to defend America's heroes and heritage against the Vandals and Visigoths of multiculturalism." 42) For his rendition of the story of Thomas Nelson, a merchant at Yorktown, governor of Virginia, and signer of the Declaration of Independence. During the Battle of Yorktown, Nelson ordered the cannons to fire at his own beautiful house because the British in that sector. "Let my trade perish," Nelson said. His home was destroyed. Comparing Nelson with the barons of American corporations today who gladly move jobs overseas, Pat said, "That is character. That is patriotism. And that is what America needs today." 43) For putting Face the Nation commentator Bob Schieffer and Gloria Borger in their places when they tried to take out of context an obviously tongue-in-cheek column Pat had written that white Christians should demand 75 percent representation at colleges and universities, "and no less!" 44) For standing up for American workers being sacrificed to the "altar of the global economy," and fighting against NAFTA, GATT and "that monstrosity, the WTO" that will cause America to lose the ability to govern itself. "There has to be one party," Pat said, "willing to stand up for our workers who are being sold down to the river into some new godless New World Order." 45) For his use of literary references in his writing. In his book, The Great Betrayal, talked of America, being tied in to global trading institutions, like Gulliver on the island of Lilliput. America will awake, only to find itself like Gulliver, "tied down strand by strand, unable to control her own destiny." 46) For cogently arguing in A Republic, Not an Empire that making military commitments around the world, by such things as expanding the number of countries in NATO, may soon come home to roost. He compared this to the commitments that Great Britain made to Poland, commitments that led to Hitler's move westward on Britain rather than eastward on Russia. "This book was written to prevent that cataclysm. This book was written to save lives," Pat said to members of the Republican party, who had "opportunistically piled on" to the "giddy applause of the establishment." 47) For his stance against pornography because it is "degrading to women, self-indulgent and counter to a healthy attitude toward sexuality." 48) For what he said he would have told Al Gore had he been in wishy-washy George W. Bush's place in the first debate in regard to the Buddhist monk fund-raising scandal. "You have defiled your office. Where is your conscience?" 49) For having the courage to stand up against "that abomination" Roe v. Wade, "that human insectide" RU-486, and for being unapologetic about having a litmus test for Supreme Court justices. 50) For rolling the dice and running for president in 2000. GO PAT GO! - ---------- end ---------- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ On the Trail.... with Pat Buchanan and Ezola Foster http://www.buchananreform.com/trail/trailmain.asp ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Internet Brigade Headquarters http://www.buchanan.org ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ BUCHANAN-FOSTER 2000 HQ 1-800-GO-PAT-GO http://www.buchananreform.com ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2000 00:05:37 -0400 From: "Linda Muller" Subject: [BRIGADE] WSJ Fears Vote Fraud Dear Brigade, Also see Jim Condit's site on Vote Fraud: http://www.votefraud.org/ FTC-Linda - -------------- From: "Steven Hoffman" Subject: Wall Street Journal Fears Vote Fraud Date sent: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 21:50:10 -0400 With Carl Limbacher and NewsMax.com Staff For the story behind the story... Tuesday, October 24, 2000 Wall Street Journal Fears Vote Fraud If the presidential election is still neck and neck on Election Day, the race may be decided by phantom voters, warns the Wall Street Journal's John Fund. "Many experts think this election could be as close as the one in 1960, when John F. Kennedy won by less than one vote per precinct. If so, this year's election could include similar allegations of vote fraud," Fund wrote in Tuesday's edition. "'Just as in 1960, the temptation to steal votes in key swing states will be enormous,'" political scientist Larry Sabato of the University of Virginia told the Journal. "Complacency is so great and enforcement so lax that the odds are we'll never know how much fraud was committed." Fund quotes other experts who believe that vote fraud is anything but a relic of the past. It's different only because it's more sophisticated. It is no longer necessary for the dead to rise on Election Day and flock to the polls - there are far easier ways to steal elections nowadays. In 1996, for example, Vice President Gore's office used the massive power of the executive branch to get the Immigration and Naturalization Service to waive "stupid rules" on background checks so that hundreds of thousands of people awaiting citizenship would be "processed in time" for the 1996 election to cast grateful votes for their Democrat benefactors. "It was later learned that 75,000 new citizens had arrest records when they applied. A spot check of 100 random new citizens by the House Judiciary Committee found that 20 percent of the sample had been arrested for serious crimes after they were given citizenship," the Journal reported. "We have the modern world's sloppiest election systems," University of Texas political scientist Walter Dean Burnham told Fund. Making fraud easier are laws such as the 1993 federal Motor Voter law that required states to allow people to register to vote when they get a driver's license. Moreover, 47 states don't require any proof of U.S. residence for enrollment. The Motor Voter law has added some 8 million people to the rolls, but the bipartisan polling team of Ed Goeas and Celinda Lake estimates that fewer than 5 percent of "motor voters" normally go to the polls. Incredibly, Janet Reno's Justice Department has often blocked states from purging people from the voting rolls who have died or changed addresses. Purging the rolls is an important check against fraud, because in most states nobody is required to show photo identification before voting and it's easy for phantom voters to use other people's names to vote. The Reno Justice Department has also taken the lead in making accusations of "voter intimidation" when anybody tries to monitor polling places for incidents of fraud. Last week, for example, Justice sent investigators to Fort Worth, Texas, to check on a political activist who distributed leaflets accusing local Democrats of casting absentee ballots on behalf of shut- in voters. Fund recalls that when the Miami Herald won a Pulitzer Prize for its reporting on the fraud in that city's mayoral election, the Pulitzer jury noted it had been subject to "a public campaign accusing the paper of ethnic bias and attempted intimidation." Local officials who've tried to purge voter rolls of felons and non- citizens have been hit with nuisance lawsuits alleging civil- rights abuse. In 1960, after JFK edged Nixon out in an election marked by massive incidents of voter fraud, a South Carolina Democrat congressman told a Nixon staff member, "You Republicans had better learn that unless you win big, we'll steal it from you." Nothing seems to have changed all that m - ------ 1Cor:1:18: For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God. - --------- end ------ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ On the Trail.... with Pat Buchanan and Ezola Foster http://www.buchananreform.com/trail/trailmain.asp ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Internet Brigade Headquarters http://www.buchanan.org ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ BUCHANAN-FOSTER 2000 HQ 1-800-GO-PAT-GO http://www.buchananreform.com ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2000 00:13:30 -0400 From: "Linda Muller" Subject: [BRIGADE] Phantom Voters: Ballot-box fraud may have real impact at the polls. Dear Brigade, "This year saw teams of election observers in Peru, Zimbabwe and Yugoslavia, countries where fraud has been rampant. Perhaps it's time for some election observers in our own backyard. Surely the right to vote includes an equal right not to have that ballot diluted by phantom or manipulated voters, especially when the stakes are nothing less than the presidency...." Looks like some are finally getting our message! Now let's raise hell and demand a true vote count by going back to paper ballots counted in the precincts by local citizens -- and in view of all - not behind closed doors! FTC-Linda From: info@brandenburghistorica.com Date sent: Tue, 24 Oct 2000 12:29:39 -0400 Organization: Brandenburg Historica To: linda@buchanan.org Subject: VOTE FRAUD! http://www.opinionjournal.com/diary/?id=65000456 JOHN FUND'S POLITICAL DIARY Phantom Voters Ballot-box fraud may have real impact at the polls. Monday, October 23, 2000 12:01 a.m. The audience laughed at the end of the third debate when George W. Bush closed by thanking his supporters and saying "for those of you for my opponent, please vote only once." It was a joke, but one with serious overtones. Many experts think this election could be as close as the one in 1960, when John F. Kennedy won by less than one vote per precinct. If so, this year's election could include similar allegations of vote fraud. "Just as in 1960, the temptation to steal votes in key swing states will be enormous," says political scientist Larry Sabato of the University of Virginia. "Complacency is so great and enforcement so lax that the odds are we'll never know how much fraud was committed." Kennedy supporters used local political bosses in Chicago and Texas to pad vote totals. Vote fraud today is more sophisticated but may be just as pervasive. "We have the modern world's sloppiest election systems," says University of Texas political scientist Walter Dean Burnham. Indeed, voter fraud has become a bigger problem since the 1993 federal Motor Voter law required states to allow people to register to vote when they get a driver's license; 47 states don't require any proof of U.S. residence for enrollment. Motor Voter has added some eight million people to the rolls, but the bipartisan polling team of Ed Goeas and Celinda Lake estimates that less than 5% of "motor voters" normally go to the polls. The Justice Department has often blocked states from weeding out people who have died or changed addresses. That's important because in most states you don't have to show photo identification to vote, making it quite easy for someone to vote in someone else's name. It also makes it easier to manipulate the growing number of absentee ballots. In 1998, more than 40% of ballots cast in Washington, Oregon and Nevada were absentee votes. Another 13 states saw between 20% and 40% of their votes cast absentee. In 1998, the mayoral election in Miami was thrown out after it was learned "vote brokers" had signed hundreds of phony absentee ballots. That same year, former Democratic Rep. Austin Murphy of Pennsylvania was convicted of absentee voter fraud. "In this area there's a pattern of nursing- home administrators frequently forging ballots under residents' names," says Sean Cavanagh, a Democratic county supervisor who uncovered the scandal. He believes law enforcement turns a blind eye to voter fraud in many other places. A number of hotly contested races this year could hinge on voter fraud. Rep. James Rogan (R., Calif.), a House impeachment manager, says that in this year's primary his sister-in-law accidentally discovered someone had cast an absentee ballot in her name. "The system is ripe for abuse," says Mr. Rogan, a former municipal judge. Mr. Rogan's biggest complaint is that California and many other states don't require voters to show any identification at the polls. This continues at a time when you have to show photo ID to cash a check, board an airplane or even get a library card. Those under age 27 now have to show ID to buy cigarettes, but not to vote. Four attempts to pass a photo ID requirement in California have died in the legislature. Some politicians try to make the current system even more susceptible to fraud. Vice President Gore's office took the lead in convincing the Immigration and Naturalization Service to waive "stupid rules" on background checks so that hundreds of thousands of people awaiting citizenship would be "processed in time" for the 1996 election. It was later learned that 75,000 new citizens had arrest records when they applied. A spot check of 100 random new citizens by the House Judiciary Committee found that 20% of the sample had been arrested for serious crimes after they were given citizenship. What can be done about voter fraud? This year, Virginia will require voters to show ID or sign a sworn statement of their identity. The Voting Integrity Project, a national watchdog group, is helping local governments clean up their voter rolls. Mike Rogers, a former Federal Bureau of Investigation agent who is running for Congress in Michigan, says one precinct in his district has had a 109% voter turnout; he plans to employ off-duty policemen to check up on polling places. But anyone who combats vote fraud comes in for abuse. The Justice Department has become expert at raising cries of "voter intimidation" at any attempt to monitor polling places. Last week Justice dispatched investigators to Fort Worth, Texas, merely because a political activist there distributed leaflets alleging Democrats were casting absentee ballots on behalf of shut-in voters. When the Miami Herald won a Pulitzer Prize for its reporting on the fraud in that city's mayoral election, the Pulitzer jury noted it had been subject to "a public campaign accusing the paper of ethnic bias and attempted intimidation." Local officials who've tried to purge voter rolls of felons and noncitizens have been hit with nuisance lawsuits alleging civil- rights abuse. Nonsense. A generation ago, the existence of insidious poll taxes and other forms of voter intimidation represented a real threat to local democracy. But those problems have receded, only to be replaced by old-fashioned ballot rigging. This year saw teams of election observers in Peru, Zimbabwe and Yugoslavia, countries where fraud has been rampant. Perhaps it's time for some election observers in our own backyard. Surely the right to vote includes an equal right not to have that ballot diluted by phantom or manipulated voters, especially when the stakes are nothing less than the presidency. Copyright © 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. - ----- end ------------- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ On the Trail.... with Pat Buchanan and Ezola Foster http://www.buchananreform.com/trail/trailmain.asp ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Internet Brigade Headquarters http://www.buchanan.org ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ BUCHANAN-FOSTER 2000 HQ 1-800-GO-PAT-GO http://www.buchananreform.com ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2000 00:32:49 -0400 From: "Linda Muller" Subject: [BRIGADE] Who Stole Your Vote? Dear Brigade, "So my question to you is this: Who counts your vote? You cannot answer because you cannot know how your vote is counted. An easier question is, who stole your vote?..." Brigade, I met Vicky Collier at the recent Vote Fraud Convention put on by Jim Condit in Cincinnati. Her father wrote the book "Vote Scam: The Stealing of America". Here is her latest article and you can check out her website at: http://www.votescam.com/frame.html FTC-Linda - ------------ YOUR STOLEN VOTE- THE MISSING PIECE OF THE PUZZLE by Victoria Collier History has taught us that to seize political power in a country, one has only to control the army and the police. That was before television. Today everyone knows that a country belongs to those who control communications. However, 99% of Americans do not know that those who control our communications also control our vote. Quite literally. In other words, we control nothing. Our vote is not even a meaningless piece of paper, because there is no longer a paper ballot. There is only the Kafkaesque reality of the computer voting machine, and the Major Media. The following information is for those who are ready to learn the facts about the theft of the American vote: how, when and why it became the property of corporate America. *********** If you're one of the 40% of Americans who still bother to cast a ballot, it's because, despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary, you think you can vote the bastards out. You retain this faith in the elections system for one reason: you believe your vote is counted fairly. Otherwise you would join the growing number of citizens regularly taking to the streets in massive protests against the government. That day may yet come. As a die-hard voter, you have yet to ask yourself why, in a democratic republic, should it be necessary to take to the streets at all? Why, in a society of, by and for the people, are citizens faced with police- state brutality when demanding their Constitutional right to gather and to speak freely? Refusing to abandon hope in the system, you vote, then rush home to get on with your life, trusting your vote is counted fairly by the government with citizen groups keeping a close watch. And like the majority of voters, you never bother to check how your vote is counted. Why should you? Stalin, a man with an irrefutable understanding of power, put it this way: "He who casts the vote decides nothing. He who counts the vote decides everything." So my question to you is this: Who counts your vote? You cannot answer because you cannot know how your vote is counted. An easier question is, who stole your vote? That answer has two parts. Part one: The Corporate Computer Hand counted paper ballots, the only completely verifiable vote counting system, have been nearly eradicated in the United States over the past thirty years. This wasn't an accident, or the benevolence of progress. The new punch-card system widely instituted across the country was remarkably easy to rig. But documented evidence of massive vote fraud-- shaved wheels, pre-printed internal voting results, forged canvass sheets, broken ballot boxes with replaceable seals-- created the need for a more subtle approach. Now the punch-card is being replaced by the computer voting machine--the most unverifiable, riggable voting system ever created.There is no longer a paper trail, no way to go back and recount if fraud is suspected. All the workings of the machine are hidden from the public eye, and the eyes of election officials. The corporations that write the vote-counting software don't consider themselves accountable to the public and refuse access to the source codes that program the machines, claiming they are "trade secrets." These corporations are paid big bucks pedaling their wares to compliant elections officials who willingly step aside, abdicating their responsibility to oversee the safety of the vote count. According to Dr. Howard Strauss, Princeton University computer scientist, "The computerized voting machine is not a door with no locks, it's a house with no doors." No candidate or voter can get in, and the possibilities for rigging an election are as varied as the programmer's skills. Where the punchcard system is still in use, the cards are counted by computer. Citizens who, for the past thirty years, have attempted to videotape the punch-card counting process in their counties have been threatened with arrest. In many counties new election officials are trained to believe it is illegal for citizens to watch the vote count! We are locked out. We now have no way of knowing how our votes are tabulated, we must simply take the word of these corporate computer programmers that they're not accepting bribes to program their software to commit vote fraud-- a temptingly simple process, impossible to detect, impossible to get caught. We must, in other words, trust them. Do you trust them? Do you know who they are? Would it surprise you to learn that Ransom Shoup, the owner of "Shouptronic," a major voting machine company, was twice convicted of vote fraud in Philadelphia? He's one, who are the rest? No longer is your neighbor, your grandmother, you or your brother able to take part in the essential democratic process of counting paper ballots and tallying the votes. Even this process has historically been rife with attempted fraud, such as "stuffing" the ballot box. But fraud on this human level is foreseeable and community oversight, if not easy, is certainly possible. Not with computers. We can no longer even watch the vote count, let alone count it ourselves. Because of this, the results are rendered immediately suspect and worthless. But a surprising number of Americans are willing to accept the corporate computer take-over of our voting system as easily as they accept the technological take-over of everything else. The rest of us will have to do better. Let's follow our vote to the next step. Part Two: The Corporate Media. Once the vote is cast and counted by computers, the unverifiable results are then transferred to Voter News Services (VNS). This little-known private media conglomerate located on 34th street in New York is one of the most powerful corporations in the world. Comprised of all the major networks-- NBC, CBS, ABC, CNN, AP, plus the New York Times and the Washington Post-- VNS is the only entity tabulating the nation's votes and disseminating the results to the public. This means that that the dramatic election night "competition" among the Networks to be first with the results is nothing but show business. They all get their numbers from the same place, including the vote "projections" supposedly based on enterance and exit polls also conducted by VNS, though hardly anyone has ever seen VNS pollsters in action. Those vote projections allow the Networks to declare a winner before the polls even close, with an accuracy approaching the metaphysical. Most people watch television on election night simply until they hear the projected winner. That's enough to convince them and they go to sleep. The trust of the public is unprecedented. So let's take a closer look at VNS. VNS has co-opted the American vote count with no public knowledge, no public bid, and remains totally exempt from anti- trust laws. They have absolutely no literature, no brochure, no fax-sheet, and most astoundingly, no Website. They have changed their name three times, yet retained the same public relations secretary. Her name is Lee C. Shapiro. The Executive Director of VNS is Bill Headline, and indeed, headlines are his specialty. But the most interesting thing about VNS is that they will not tell you anything about what they do. They are so scrupulously secretive that they might easily have been formed behind the doors of the KGB, or for that matter, the NSA. They are so powerful that they make no pretenses. No, you cannot watch their operation. No, you cannot get in the door on election night. No, you cannot work for them. You also can't get a straight answer from them over the telephone as to exactly how they count the vote, where they do it, and who does it for them. They do not expect to be questioned. A simple telephone call requesting information evokes immediate suspicion. They become hostile and suprisingly nervous. They stammer, stutter and mumble vague contradictions. Then, if your question become too pointed, (example: "Can I bring a videotape to your headquarters on election night to watch you count the vote and tabulate exit polls?"), they will simply hang up on you. Somewhere, Stalin is laughing. In light of the World Bank, the IMF, and the WTO, it shouldn't surprise us that the vote, like the rest of the world, is in the hands of a few. The major media has carte blanche to manipulate it at will, and the computers guarantee no paper trail. The media for at least half a century has functioned as an effective mouthpiece for corrupt government, for the prison- industrial complex, for the corporate elite, vigorously censoring vital information on ecological destruction and social injustice. We know now that when it comes to elections, despite their "competitive" front, they are truly one organism. If there was any fraud in the VNS vote count, who would report on it? Who is the watchdog? There are none. Not even the alternative press can get their hands on information regarding the count, because VNS simply will not let anyone in the door on election night. It is a secret ballot count. A number of well known independent investigators have been courageously exposing massive, nation-wide fraud for the past thirty years, including rigged voting machines; an epidemic of corrupt elections officials, League of Women Voter members, and state and Federal judges; and a treasonous Attorney General Janet Reno, who won her long-held powerful post by single handedly burying vote fraud evidence for over 25 years. But the iron curtain of the major media has slammed down on these investigations despite the FBI documented evidence, making it impossible to bring the truth to the public. The only thorough, reliable source of information has been a book titled "Votescam: The Stealing of America," by James and Kenneth Collier. Published in 1992, the book has been banned by all major book chains. Nevertheless, it has sold over 30,000 copies by word of mouth. The Collier's, America's lead investigators into vote fraud, were not afraid to name the thieves and shed light on a black moment in history: when the government gave up the right to count the vote. Often told by Barnes and Noble that Votescam is out of print, many have had to search long and hard to find it, until now. The Internet, largely responsible for the success of Seattle and Washington D.C. protests, has emerged as the people's most powerful weapon; free press. Global and instantaneous. All of the vote fraud evidence has been recently posted on two important Websites: www.votescam.com and www.votefraud.org. These are the Websites of two very different groups. One is a liberal publishing company and the other a conservative political organization, illustrating that fair elections are everyone's responsibility, there are no party lines in this battle. Both these groups are deeply involved in vote fraud investigations, and demand the return to the paper ballot and citizen control. These new sites are already receiving hundreds of visitors each month. Every day more Americans are learning the truth: That the vote count is kept under lock and key by a small group of arrogant people who can be brought down. Yes, brought down. Like the WTO, the IMF and the World Bank, like any system contrived without us, run by a handful of criminals. Indeed, until we take control of our own election system, the above mentioned global organized crime rings will have to be fought by very unpleasant means. Strikes, shut- downs, lock-downs, protests, brute force, and the gassing, beating, jailing, and possible imprisonment of thousands of Americans. This, at the very least, is what any radical progressive movement can expect. Because as long as the control of the democratic machine in America is in the hands of the corporations, we the people will have NO ACCESS to the workings of the system. We will not be able to elect our own representatives who will clean up the mess the corporate criminals have created. We will be forced to gather outside their gates and scream for justice at our own expense. How long can we continue to do this, and where will it end? Even after Seattle, it's busines as usual at the WTO. China is in, despite the rallying of hundreds of thousands of American workers to oppose the trade deal. Our "elected" representatives certainly aren't worried about not getting enough votes the next time around. Let's free ourselves from the paralyzing confusion of believing we asked for our problems by reelecting the same corrupt leaders who caused them. We've got to take the system back. Let them know we're not going to sleep through the elections any longer, we're going to start organizing. We're going to be running our own candidates, we are not going to accept candidates who are financed by multinational corporations, and we are not going to accept the results of an election counted by corporate computers and the major media. We are going to hand count our own recycled paper ballots. And it's going to take a good long time to count them, and we won't worry about making the seven o'clock news, because that's the only way we'll know it's fair. Come on, let's vote the bastards out! - -------- end ------- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ On the Trail.... with Pat Buchanan and Ezola Foster http://www.buchananreform.com/trail/trailmain.asp ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Internet Brigade Headquarters http://www.buchanan.org ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ BUCHANAN-FOSTER 2000 HQ 1-800-GO-PAT-GO http://www.buchananreform.com ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2000 00:58:21 -0400 From: "Linda Muller" Subject: [BRIGADE] PBS Makes Political Donation to Republicans and Democrats From:"Jason & Beverly Kidder" Subject: PRESS RELEASE FROM THE REFORM PARTY Date sent: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 14:16:05 -0400 October 25, 2000 Press Release from the Reform Party PBS Makes Political Donation to Republicans and Democrats Government funded agency ignores other parties FCC complaint pending Tucson, Arizona--"While we are totally for campaign finance reform, the decision of the Public Broadcasting System (PBS) to donate airtime to only the Republican and Democratic Presidential candidates is no more that giving them a political contribution, while ignoring the other candidates," said Gerry Moan, Chairman of the Reform Party. Yesterday PBS announced that it would give airtime to only the Republican and Democrat candidates for 8 nights following Jim Lehrer's "NewsHour." PBS is funded not only by the federal government, but also by state governments, corporate sponsors and "viewers like you." PBS stations are supposedly owned by the people, through a FCC licencing system to insure that voices that did not have sponsors, such as the arts and children's programming, would have access to the airwaves. "Over half of the registered voters and taxpayers do not belong to either the Republican or the Democratic Party, so why should only those parties get all the airtime?" asked Frank Reed, Vice Chair of the Reform Party. Other party members question the legality of the airtime. "Without all viable parties included, this is nothing more than a donation in kind," said Pat Choate, Ross' Perot's running mate in 1996. "The Reform, Green, Libertarian, and Constitution Parties should have the same access. Anything less would be a violation of their license and the constitution." The Reform Party is planning to file a complaint with the FCC. Contact: Toll free- 1-877-GO REFORM ### - --------- end ---------- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ On the Trail.... with Pat Buchanan and Ezola Foster http://www.buchananreform.com/trail/trailmain.asp ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Internet Brigade Headquarters http://www.buchanan.org ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ BUCHANAN-FOSTER 2000 HQ 1-800-GO-PAT-GO http://www.buchananreform.com ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2000 10:40:35 -0400 From: "Linda Muller" Subject: [BRIGADE] Fox ALSO Makes Political Donation to GOP & Dems From: "lmvh" Subject: Fox ALSO Makes Political Donation to GOP & Dems Date sent: Thu, 26 Oct 2000 08:52:41 -0700 Gore to speak first in Fox broadcast NEW YORK, Oct. 25 (UPI) -- Fox Broadcasting announced Wednesday that Vice President Al Gore will speak first, followed by Texas Gov. George W. Bush, when the two presidential candidates share one hour of free air time on Fox Friday night. The order was determined by a coin flip, according to Andrew Butcher, a spokesman for the network. Butcher said the Bush campaign called heads, and the coin came up tails. He said the Gore campaign chose to have its candidate speak first. Gary Ginsberg, executive vice president of News Corporation, the network's parent company, told United Press International the offer arose out of company chairman Rupert Murdoch's "long, consistent" belief that networks should provide candidates with free air time. Ginsberg said Murdoch "just thinks it's good public policy and good corporate citizenship," but it "should be done voluntarily, not mandated by the government." He said the Friday-night speeches will feature the candidates "talking into a camera, giving their rationale as to why Americans should vote for them." Butcher said that according to the rules set down by Fox, the candidates would speak for about 28 minutes each with "no interruptions, no breaks, no editing, no opportunity to change. "They can tape their speeches anywhere they like," he said. "We've offered to let them use our production facilities or they can use their own, as long as someone from Fox News Channel is present to make sure the rules are adhered to." The spokesman also said the candidates were free to use any background they choose, as long as they don't use "the trappings" of the governor's office or the vice-president's office. The speeches will air at 8 p.m. on the East and West coasts, and at 7 p.m. Central and Mountain time. In addition, the Fox News Channel will rebroadcast the hour on Saturday at 3 p.m. EDT. The offer is a costly proposition for News Corporation. In order to present the candidates without commercial interruption, Fox is pre-empting "Police Videos." "It's very, very expensive," said Ginsberg. "This offer does not come without its costs. It's not a write-off. It's a cost we're going to incur but we think it's well worth incurring for the benefit it's providing to the American electorate." Besides the lost ad revenue, Ginsberg said Fox is also spending money to promote the hour "on the air and in print." He also said he is "pretty certain" that nearly all of the network's local affiliates will carry the hour. Asked whether any of the affiliates had asked Fox to compensate them for lost revenues from local ads, Ginsberg said, "That is not an issue." Ginsberg said the public has been "very supportive" of Fox's offer. "They think it's a great idea," he said, "and they're sorry the other networks didn't make the same offer. Our hope is that others will see the contribution we're making to the political dialogue this time and choose to join us the next time around." Spokesmen for other networks refused to speak for the record about that, but one pointed out that CBS and ABC carried all three Presidential Commission debates live -- dedicating more than four times as much prime time to debates as Fox is turning over to candidate speeches on Friday. Fox did not air the Commission debates live because it premiered the new James Cameron series, "Dark Angel," on the night of the first debate, and aired baseball playoff games on the nights of the second and third debates. Butcher said the network aired the debates on a tape-delayed basis, following the nightly news. The Fox News Channel carried all three debates live. - --------- end -------- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ On the Trail.... with Pat Buchanan and Ezola Foster http://www.buchananreform.com/trail/trailmain.asp ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Internet Brigade Headquarters http://www.buchanan.org ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ BUCHANAN-FOSTER 2000 HQ 1-800-GO-PAT-GO http://www.buchananreform.com ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2000 11:46:28 -0400 From: "Linda Muller" Subject: [BRIGADE] !BEST! PJB Interview! - A Talk With Pat Buchanan Dear Brigade -- THIS IS ONE OF THE BEST! It's a terrific interview with Chronicles Magazine and includes MANY MORE reasons why we LOVE Pat! Read it and forward to ALL and then forward it AGAIN! FTC-Linda - ------- From: "lmvh" Subject: Fw: A Talk With Pat Buchanan Date sent: Sat, 21 Oct 2000 20:32:14 -0700 >From the _Chronicles_ magazine November 2000 issue: "I'm Liberated; Free at Last!" A Talk With Pat Buchanan by Bill Kauffman Pat Buchanan has taken more punches than Chuck Wepner, but unlike the Bayonne Bleeder, Buchanan has a good right hook (or is it now a left?) of his own. The year began with Buchanan defending his feisty anti- interventionist manifesto _A Republic, Not an Empire_: Not since the days of Arkansas Sen. William Fulbright, the one good Bill Arkansas has minted, had a major American politician used the e-word. Invited to join the Reform Party by the hirelings of Texas populist Ross Perot, Buchanan was sandbagged by the Perotistas when it became clear that, unlike Perot's 1996 competitor for the Reform nomination, he would not be a sacrificial Lamm. Buchanan defeated his principal foe for the Reform endorsement, transcendental- meditation apostle John Hagelin, before being laid low by gallbladder-related problems. Bill Kauffman spoke with Buchanan as the convalescent candidate prepared to hit the campaign trail. KAUFFMAN: Have you tried transcendental meditation for this gallbladder thing? BUCHANAN (chuckling): Well, it may be better for the stomach. K: You get the worst press of any presidential candidate since George Wallace in '68. Why? B: There are a couple of reasons. One is that we really stand up against the national media establishment on all issues, not just a few. Secondly, I've been a party to all of the great controversies of our time, and I've been on the other side from the national press in all of those controversies: Vietnam, court- ordered busing, the Supreme Court and its decisions on life and prayer. I supported the most unpopular war in American history and opposed the most popular. In addition, I'm now challenging not only the liberal Democratic establishment, which I've fought all my life, but we've taken on also the Republican/conservative establishment. So I have no base of support whatsoever in the national media. Where I find my support is places like _Chronicles_ and _Middle American News_ and, to some degree, _Human Events_ and _Southern Partisan_ - which are, it is fair to say, not in the mainstream (laughter). K: You're the first presidential candidate in 75 years, since Bob La Follette, to try to put together a left-right coalition against involvement in foreign wars. Are you still sanguine about the possibility of left-right cooperation, or are you discouraged? B: Let's separate Buchanan from Buchanan's beliefs and visions. Whatever happens to me, the ideas for which we are fighting right now are going to triumph. The American people are never again going to send a great army overseas to fight some bloody war that has no direct impact on the vital interests of the United States. We are an overcommitted nation that has half of the military power it had in 1990, but with far more commitments - from Eastern Europe to the Balkans to the Persian Gulf, even to the Taiwan Straits - than we had at the end of the Cold War. The time is coming when the bankruptcy of US foreign policy is going to be exposed, and when it is, the establishment will find that there is nothing behind their commitments. The American people don't understand them, don't know about them, and are going to be unwilling to pay for them with the blood of their sons. One of the stupidest things this country ever did was to miss the opportunity at the end of the Cold War to get rid of all these commitments which were designed for a global war against a hostile empire that no longer exists. We're going to roll up this empire just the way the British and French did. I'm very sanguine that we're going to win this battle one day. "America First" as a foreign policy is the only foreign policy that the American people will support over the long haul. You can get them ginned up for a crusade against the latest Hitler - Saddam Hussein in the Gulf - and you can even get them, though they were not enthusiastic, to support smashing a little country like Serbia that they don't know a thing about except what they read in the papers about them all being horrible people. But I'll tell you, if you start taking casualties in great numbers, Americans will balk and resist. K: Did your choice of Ezola Foster as a running mate indicate an abandonment of a left-right strategy? A lot of people expected you to take a labor Democrat. B: We were looking over a lot of the labor Democrats, but I did make a solemn commitment that the individual would be pro- life. So when we chose Ezola Foster, it was not any abandonment of an effort to reach out to folks like the _Antiwar.com_ folks, who support us primarily on foreign policy. K: What did you learn from your dance with Lenora Fulani? B: That alliance was basically a straight political deal where I would agree to support the campaign reforms that she recommended, and I did, and I still do, and she gave me her support. But when the interests of her people in the various states collided with our interests, one after another, we defeated her people and tossed them out and put ours in. We were determined to get that nomination. No matter who was opposed to us, we would go in and defeat them. Because this is not a game for us and we're not going to put our future in the hands of anyone else. I think she saw the Buchanan Brigades taking over the whole party nationally. So she came to me in New York and demanded to be chairman of the national Reform Party. I said, "Would you like some more corn flakes?" And it was all over. The _New York Times_ wrote a story on it and did not even mention the fact that she had demanded to be chairman of the party. K: They also refer to John Hagelin as a physicist. B (laughing): He saves a lot in airfares. K: When you jumped to Reform, did you have any previous third-party models in mind? B: No. I've read a great deal about third parties, and Governor Wallace was a friend of mine; I used to go visit him before he died. And I'm familiar with Norman Thomas and all the rest. After I saw that we could move the crowd as well as I did at Ames, Iowa, but I simply couldn't afford running against seven different people, it seemed to me that I could not win the Republican Party nomination. So the question was, "Are we going to let the things we believe in die for lack of a champion, or are we going to go ahead and grab this party and try to make it an America First party?" And I said, "Why don't we just go ahead and do it?" At least the American people will have a chance to vote on these ideas. What makes me very hopeful is that there was no majority for the war in the Balkans; the Senate barely got a majority for the war in the Gulf. NAFTA did not have majority support in this country, and neither did the Mexican bailout. Now, because of the good economy and because everybody at least has got a job, even though they're nervous, people are saying, "Well, don't rock the boat. Buchanan may be right, but things look like they're pretty good to me. I don't like these deals either, but I've got a job." But a crunch has got to come. And when it comes, the national establishment will find out that underneath it is an enormous hollow space. The country will not sustain the establishment. This whole damn New World Order is being put together for a lot of parasites, and the American people have no emotional interest in it; they tend to go along with it until they're going to be asked to make some major contribution to sustain it. They're going to say, "Why do we want all this stuff?" At that point, I think they'll say, "What was that guy's name back there? Buchanan." K: In your famous interview with Norman Mailer in _Esquire_ in 1996, Mailer kept urging you to quit the Republicans. The Republicans are the Corporation, said Mailer, and they'll kill you before they'll let you have the nomination. Was Norman right? B: Yup (laughter). Norman was right. My problem is that I am very, very loyal to institutions and things I've been attached to. And it's very, very hard for me to break. My sister has no problem with that (laughter). K: Some had hoped that the Reform Party would become a broad-based populist movement united around anti-globalist causes and political reform. Ross Perot might represent its center, you its right, and someone like Ralph Nader or Jerry Brown its left. Is that a possibility anymore? B: It sure is to me. The whole New World Order: These are much stronger issues with me than they ever were with Ross. Ross was very strong on the trade issue, as I am; but in terms of bringing the troops home and defunding these global institutions like the IMF and the World Bank, I think I'm stronger. I was out there in Seattle, and what you've got to realize is that many on the left think the IMF and the World Bank aren't generous enough. Many of them don't mind the World Trade Organization as long as it will do their will. But I'm for bringing these things down. Folks who want to restore American independence, wherever they are on the spectrum, are welcome. Now some won't come to me because I'm pro-life. But that is simply who I am. And I am not walking away from those folks or that vision or that ideal or the idea that we ought to alter the Supreme Court and decentralize government dramatically. States' rights: I think the survival of our country lies in this idea, where states can be different from other states, and the feds don't impose one rule upon the whole nation from the Supreme Court. Folks vote in each state as to how they want to live and what values and traditions they want respected and supported in law. That's the way it was originally intended for a great democratic republic; we would be a very diverse people. I don't mind the fact that I don't have a right to impose my values on Greenwich Village, but I don't want Greenwich Village imposing its values on me. K: My impression is that the Buchanan Brigades are much more libertarian than is commonly believed. Maybe a third of your convention delegates, for instance, would have supported calling off the national drug war. Is there room for anti-drug war people in a Buchananite Reform Party? B: Yup, there's room for them. I don't know that we would adopt that posture, but let me tell you, my friend Lyn Nofziger told me, when he endorsed me as a Republican, that he had gotten marijuana for his daughter, who was dying at the time, and that I ought to know that because it was common knowledge. I said, "Well, that doesn't bother me in the least." If I were a prosecutor, I would say, "That's pretty far down the list in terms of things we're going to prosecute in this office. We've got more important things to look at than that." I understand the libertarian argument on drugs; I don't agree with it, Bill, and I'll tell you why. I went in Iowa to one of these centers for gals who had been pregnant and on drugs but had cleaned up their act. It was both a daycare center and sort of a home where they would come at night; they had jobs. These little toddlers were all slopping down their cereal. It was very funny and very pleasant. I asked the fellow there, "Did these kids suffer any permanent damage?" and he said ten percent of the kids in Iowa are born of mothers who are drug-afflicted, and half of those kids never fully recover from the impact of that. These little kids are simply growing up with a horrible existence. And I'm afraid if you decriminalize of legalize narcotics . . . it's not a victimless crime. K: But the same argument was always made about alcohol during Prohibition: You're really doing it for the children, because drunkards are bad parents. B: There's no doubt that alcoholism is a serious problem, but I know friends who have been alcoholics, and some of them are dead after 30 years; and I've known kids who have been drug addicts, and they were dead in their early 20's. K: Do you sympathize with the move to make marijuana legal for medical purposes? B: That's a state-by-state decision. K: Although as soon as a state approves legalization, the Republicans want to send the feds in. B: In violation of their states' rights precepts. On that one, if the state votes the decision, I think you have to respect it. On the federal level, although I can see what's happening down in Colombia, I just am not ready to give up on the drug war because I think the other side would be worse. Maybe I'm wrong. K: You mentioned _Antiwar.com_. Justin Raimondo, its editor, is one of your most eloquent and tireless champions. B: He's wonderful. Justin nominated me. K: Justin is a good guy. He is also openly gay. Would that fact disqualify him from a spot in a Buchanan administration? B: No. Look, Justin is not someone who runs around the country advocating the gay-rights agenda; he's opposed to it. He believes in freedom. He's opposed to the idea of using federal power to say that people have to hire him whether they like him or not. He is a homosexual, and I don't know how people get that way, but he's a very loyal guy to me. I have two people who have been "outed" who have been very supportive of me in three campaigns, and I'm proud to have their support because it probably takes a hell of a lot more moral courage for them to support me, especially where Justin lives, than it does for folks elsewhere. You know what he said when I issued a strong statement? He said, "Who gives a damn if I can't be ambassador to Luxembourg?" (laughter). K: The two parties have their Hollywood partisans: Barbra Streisand for the Democrats and Bo Derek for the Republicans, now that Efrem Zimbalist, Jr., has retired. Who are the Hollywood Buchananites? B: Virginia Mayo . . . most of them are from the previous generation. K: I heard that Mel Gibson was a supporter. B: No, I wouldn't say that. Don't end _The Patriot_'s career! (laughter). I think Mel Gibson probably comes out of a traditional Catholic, pre-Vatican II upbringing, and he shares a lot of these values and beliefs and his great love of patriotism and the warrior virtues and things of the Scotch-Irish. We have a lot in common, but don't put that anchor around this guy's neck. I want to see more of his movies (laughter). K: How do we bust up the concentration of media ownership? B: You have to use the antitrust laws, and I'd certainly be prepared to. Newspapers, for example, should be owned by Americans. I'm not sure what Bill Gates did to me to be attacked by the antitrust division of the Department of Justice. As far as I know, he tried to give me a free browser. Microsoft is a national asset. If they did something wrong, fine them, and tell them, "Don't do it again." But don't smash up this company. Take a look at what's far more dangerous: a concentration of power, in which a handful of companies get control of the mechanism by which ideas and information and political news are spread throughout a society of 270 million people. I thought CNN was a great idea, and frankly I didn't like the idea of it merging with [Time-Warner], and now they're going to merge with AOL. Two or three people in the country are going to be able to decide the career, or the noncareer, of virtually every journalist and columnist and commentator in America. They'll be able to kill all but the biggest, like a Rush Limbaugh; and even there they have enormous power. So I do believe in maximum decentralization of the media. K: What about requiring radio and TV licensees to live in the cities in which they have licenses? B: I think that's a great idea. You should have some kind of preference in the law for folks who live in the town, because these absentee landlords sit up there and own 85 or 100 newspapers and they don't give a hoot about what's going on in Podunk, as long as the _Podunk News_ makes money. They go out there and reformat it and put their bingo games in, and it ceases to be a community newspaper. If every radio station and every newspaper were owned by people who lived in the town, it would be far better than these giant media conglomerates. K: Have you lost any friends over your defection from the Republican Party? B: There weren't all that many to lose, Bill (laughter). I'm not a great socialite around DC, never have been. I can't think of anybody who was a great personal friend who is not now. K: Have you ever talked to Dick Lamm about his treatment by the Perot people in '96? B: No, I have not, but somebody I know talked to him. This is one reason we've got the fight with the Perot people. We saw what was done to Lamm, and early on we picked up signs that the Dallas people, in giving us advice on whom to support and not to support, and whether to get on the ballot as the Reform Party or as an individual, were making decisions and giving us counsel that would leave them with the capacity to take it away from us, if they so chose. So we decided to follow our own strategy and make sure I went to Long Beach with an insurance policy of two-thirds of all delegates. We started to act deliberately and consciously in our interest, making our own decisions, doing what was best for us. When they offered advice we would say "Thanks," and we might accept it if we thought it was consistent with our interests, and if it wasn't, we would do what we wanted to do. That's why, for example, when we were asked by them to go down and get the Reform Party on the ballot in Texas, we said "No, we're going to get me on the ballot in Texas." If we had gotten the Reform Party on the ballot in Texas, I'm sure there would have been an effort to give that line to Hagelin. This is the source of the great conflict with Dallas; it's got nothing to do with social issues. They knew exactly where I stood on those when I joined. K: You famously threw punches at a Washington policeman as a young man, and you have a pugilistic image. Were you tempted to throw any punches during the Reform Party convention? B: No, I was thinking of my coming surgery (laughter). Somebody might have punched me in the stomach, and that would have been it. At the Reform Party convention, I told all our people, "Look, be sweet, be nice - no punches thrown," because we won. When you win, it's the guys that are losing that throw the first punch. K: Do you expect that, in 2002, Reform will field Buchananite candidates for governorships and Senate and House seats and such? B: That would be the clear plan, but we have to see how well we do and how well I am. But here's the thing: This is a long- term commitment. I'm not going back to the Republican Party: I'm liberated; free at last! (laughter). K: Could you see yourself supporting Reform candidates in 2002 who are with you on most issues but not abortion? B: That's where I have a real problem. I have a problem defeating a candidate who has stood up for right-to-life, which takes great courage these days. If my guy supports life and the other Buchanan things, of course I can support him, even against a conservative Republican. People say, "That's an impediment, Pat; you can never put together a coalition as long as you believe that." Well, if that's true, that's true, and there's nothing I can do about that. But I'm not changing. K: What if they disagree with you on decentralist grounds, saying, "Look, there should not be a federal law against partial- birth abortion; this should be legislated at the local level." B: Do they agree _Roe v. Wade_ should be overturned? K: Presumably. B: If they take a stand that _Roe v. Wade_ should be overturned, and it should be returned to the states, I think that's a pro-life position. K: What do you expect will be your place in American political history? Harbinger, gadfly . . . ? B: I've had a phenomenal run in my life. I came into politics at just the right time. I was on the Goldwater right, an editorial writer, and in my heart I went through that whole crushing defeat. I was the first one to arrive in Richard Nixon's office in 1965. I was with Nixon in the entire run-up into the White House all the way through China and the summits and '72, and with him that very day when he left in the helicopter. You know, I thought that my political career had ended then. And then I went into journalism, and I had a great ten-year run, and Ronald Reagan brought me into the White House. I was there at Rejkavik and all those summits, and I was in the White House during the heyday of the conservative movement. I supported Bush, I went back and had a great career in journalism, and then I almost knocked off the President of the United States in New Hampshire. I gave a memorable speech at the Republican Convention, probably the most controversial of the 20th century. And then four years later, we were the sensation of 1996, until we were overwhelmed by the Republican establishment. I'm the only journalist that ever won the New Hampshire primary. It was a great run, and now I've taken this course . . . You know, they've buried me ten times (laughter). We've got a couple more lives left. I've had a wonderful life. I'll tell you, Bill, being out there building this party from scratch and fighting all these battles in one state after another - it's a wonderful experience. I thought I was 20 years old again. It was one of the wisest and best decisions I've ever made. Why would I want to be up there in Philadelphia, held in confinement like the rest of the conservatives in the basement somewhere at George Bush's convention? And being trotted out in front of the cameras to say "this represents the restoration of Reaganism" (laughter). I can't do it anymore. It's been a hell of an interesting life. I'm in tough shape physically right now, and I'm a 100-to-1 shot, but I'm in the final four (laughter). K: How influential has _Chronicles_ been in your political evolution over the last ten years? B: _Chronicles_ has been to me, in the last ten years, what _National Review_ was in the very early 1960's, with this difference: _Chronicles_ repeatedly comes to my defense. Of course, the only defense I needed in the early 60's was legal (laughter). K: What spot will Sam Francis have in the Buchanan cabinet? B: I'd have him hanging around the White House (laughter). He would be Secretary of Heritage. K: Maybe he can be in charge of the anti-tobacco campaign in the Buchanan administration. B: That's right: Surgeon General! - ------ Chronicles: A Magazine of American Culture is published monthly for $39.00 (foreign subscriptions add $12.00 for surface delivery, $48.00 for Air Mail) per year by The Rockford Institute, 928 North Main Street, Rockford, IL 61103-7061. www.chroniclesmagazine.org - ------ end -------- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ On the Trail.... with Pat Buchanan and Ezola Foster http://www.buchananreform.com/trail/trailmain.asp ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Internet Brigade Headquarters http://www.buchanan.org ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ BUCHANAN-FOSTER 2000 HQ 1-800-GO-PAT-GO http://www.buchananreform.com ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ------------------------------ End of brigade-l V1 #115 ************************