Wilson and Bryan was the transitional generation for the Dems.
Wilson was a Southerner who happened to be an educated conservative,
and he was not one of those orthodox Southern Democrats in his days.
After all, he became President of Princeton and Governor of New
Jersey before the Presidency. I like Taft for being real and honest,
even I think he was a little too passive and conservative as an Ohio
Republican a century ago. But, to be fair, Taft was just as centrist
as Wilson.

The country wanted progressives at a time when the Triangle Factory
Fire just happened, and the anti-child labor sentiment and women's
rights movement were fermenting. The 1912 election was all about
the "America can do better" feelings.

Ram


--- In prezveepsenator@yahoogroups.com, THOMAS JOHNSON
<AVRCRDNG@F...> wrote:
> Thanks,Ram, for the clarification  and the BookTV
> interview about the 1912 election. First of all, I'd
> like to apologize to the legacy of Taft for comparing
> Bush to him.. After learning more about him, I feel
> like I slimed him by lumping him in with Bush 43.
> In reading the interview, I was very surprised to
> learn that of the 4 nominees ( Taft, Wilson, Roosevelt
> and Debs)  in the 1912 presidential race, that Wilson
> seemed to have the most in common with Bush, in that
> they govern(ed) from a place  of divine ordination,
> although it is not clear to me whether Wilson applied
> that philosophy in general or just in the Treaty of
> Versailles. I have read that Wilson was prone to use
> the threat of prosecution of  sedition as a political
> tool and was not above using propaganda. I'm curious
> whether that it is   reasonable to assume that Deb's
> incarceration under the Espionage Act was an attempt
> to lessen his impact on the 1920 race.
> I found the image of a weeping Taft being the last to
> leave TR's grave site pretty touching, and the fact
> that TR delivered a 50 minute speech, immediately
> after taking a bullet in the chest, astounding.
>
> Tom Johnson
>
>
>
>
> --- Ram Lau <ramlau@y...> wrote:
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Because of his deep sense of fairness and equality
> that the original
> Republican Party embraced, Taft made a superb Supreme
> Court Chief
> Justice. I find it impossible to picture what kind of
> Justice Bush or
> Cheney would be, but I pray to God (and I only bother
> God when
> necessary) that a Justice Bush/Cheney will never
> happen to mankind.
>
> The 1912 election was a critical election. The
> Democratic Party for
> the first time experienced the progressive elements
> that Woodrow
> Wilson and William Jennings Bryan embraced, while the
> Republican Party
> began to turn from a center-left party to something
> totally different
> half a century later. Here is the transcript of the
> BookTV interview
> with the author of the book "1912: Wilson, Roosevelt,
> Taft, and Debs -
> The Election That Changed the Country," a very
> readable book:
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/prezveepsenator/message/192
>
> Ram
>
>
> --- In prezveepsenator@yahoogroups.com, THOMAS JOHNSON
> <AVRCRDNG@F...>
> wrote:
> > Greg and Ram and all, thanks for the responses and
> > welcoming me into the group. I have entertained the
> > notion that perhaps the Taft presidency was the most
> > analogous to our current inhabitant. He was born
> into
> > political privilege, divisive, pious,
> > anti-environment, and a pawn of the party machinery
> > (TR claimed they stole the 1912 Republican
> > nomination). I also  would have included a puppet of
> > big business, but after doing a little reading
> > tonight, he apparently  did some trust-busting. He
> > seems to have had a pretty good post-presidency,
> > including serving on the US Supreme Court. I also
> find
> > it heartening that he and TR, who had been close
> > friends( Taft was TR's hand-picked successor), and
> > were able to have an amicable lunch together before
> > the latter's death , significant in  that in  the
> 1912
> > primaries terms such as 'fathead' and 'congenital
> > liar' were thrown at each other.
> >  I caught a bit of the Carl Sferrazza Anthony Cspan
> > interview on the subject of Nellie Taft  that Ram
> > alluded to and  came away with feeling that she was
> > pretty cool..thanks Ram for the link to see the
> whole
> > segment and for the great Coolidge interview, the
> Debs
> > profile and for answering my question. I'm learning
> a
> > lot form you guys.
> >
> > Tom Johnson
> >
> > --- Greg Cannon <gregcannon1@y...> wrote:
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------
> > I can't answer your question, Tom, though I'd also
> > like to know the answer. Do you or anyone here have
> > suggestions on books or websites to do with the Taft
> > administration? The Roosevelt biography I'm reading
> > has been mentioning Taft a lot, how Teddy began
> > sending him on important missions and taking Taft
> into
> > his confidence, at least as early as 1905 though
> > probably earlier.
> >
> > Roosevelt's occasional anti-trust prosecutions of
> > monopolies raised quite a storm in his first term,
> but
> > he never went as far as the progressives wanted, and
> > he angered progressives by insisting on "open shops"
> > among government employees.
> >
> > I'd like to see a similar reaction by the
> progressive
> > movement now, as you mention, but how would that
> come
> > about? Right now progressives seem to be very much
> on
> > the defense.
> >
> > --- THOMAS JOHNSON <AVRCRDNG@F...> wrote:
> >
> > > I'm really enjoying the posting from this group
> and
> > > am
> > > curious if anyone thinks the progressive advances
> > > that
> > >  were developing around 100 years ago, such as
> > > suffrage and shorter workdays,  were due at least
> in
> > > part to a backlash against the robber barons and
> the
> > > Taft administration. It would give me hope if a
> > > pious,
> > >  pro big business president such as Taft inspired
> > > the
> > > progressive movement to rebel and  a similar
> > > reaction
> > > could repeat itself a century later.
> > >
> > > Tom Johnson
> > >
> > > --- Greg Cannon <gregcannon1@y...> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------
> > > I agree with you, but I fear that if taken too far
> > > then the party's message might become only
> marketing
> > > and packaging, with a great lack of substance. At
> > > the
> > > moment though the Democrats seem to be lacking on
> > > both
> > > accounts. They never fully committed to either
> > > opposing or supporting Bush's foreign policy and
> his
> > > policies on civil rights, and they failed
> miserably
> > > when they attempted to explain their ambivalence
> to
> > > the voters.
> > >
> > > What did the Socialists say in 1904? I've been
> > > reading
> > > a Teddy Roosevelt biography and recently finished
> > > the
> > > part on the 1904 election and didn't hear the
> > > Socialists mentioned. The Democrats sure seem to
> > > have
> > > picked an unfortunate candidate that year, a judge
> > > named Alton Parker who was apparently picked
> because
> > > he seemed very very nonpartisan, uncontroversial,
> > > and
> > > boring in contrast to Roosevelt who was very
> > > flamboyant and nearly always controversial.
> > >
> > > --- Ram Lau <ramlau@y...> wrote:
> > >
> > > > In politics and in my years of studying
> politics,
> > > > I've come to the
> > > > conclusion that marketing and packaging matter
> > > more
> > > > than anything
> > > > else. The GOP has a much better marketing team
> and
> > > > are willing to go
> > > > for the nasties, that's why they keep winning.
> The
> > > > Dems are simply
> > > > whiney losers who keep picking the wrong (and
> less
> > > > than bright)
> > > > candidates. Moral high ground is not the way to
> > > go,
> > > > the elitist
> > > > liberals should understand. And, honestly, most
> > > > people don't vote on
> > > > the issues.
> > > >
> > > > LBJ's prophecy upon signing the Civil Rights Act
> > > in
> > > > 1964: "We have
> > > > just lost the South for a generation." He's dead
> > > > WRONG. They had
> > > > lost the South for generations. The only times
> > > when
> > > > the Democratic
> > > > candidate could win the South and thus the
> > > election
> > > > were all
> > > > accidental (when the GOP screwed up very badly)
> -
> > > > namely, the
> > > > Watergate referendum year (1976) and the Perot
> > > year
> > > > (1992). Then it
> > > > took a Clinton miracle to get re-elcted in 1996.
> > > > Even worse, both
> > > > Carter and Clinton had to be a Southerner to
> > > > attractive the Southern
> > > > moderates who don't usually vote to garner
> enough
> > > > support to win.
> > > >
> > > > The only issues that matter to most - abortion,
> > > > civil rights (from
> > > > affirmative action to gay rights), and religious
> > > > freedom - are what
> > > > the Southerners care about (to deprive them) and
> > > the
> > > > liberals have
> > > > never been on their side. That's why the
> > > > pro-slavery, anti-women
> > > > rights, xenophobic South was the Democratic
> > > bastion
> > > > in the pre-FDR
> > > > days when the Yankee Republicans were controlled
> > > by
> > > > the liberals.
> > > >
> > > > Liberalism doesn't sell well in the South in the
> > > > past 200 years, and
> > > > I doubt ever will. Ironically enough, these
> > > liberals
> > > > always get what
> > > > they want a generation later or two. Read the
> > > > platform of the
> > > > Socialist Party in 1904. What was perceived as
> the
> > > > far left agenda,
> > > > we have adopted most of it. That's why I'm still
> > > > hopeful in a longer
> > > > term perspective even very disturbed in these
> > > days.
> > > >
> > > > Ram
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------
> > >   YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
> > >
> > >
> > >     Visit your group "prezveepsenator" on the web.
> > >
> > >     To unsubscribe from this group, send an email
> > > to:
> > >  prezveepsenator-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> > >
> > >     Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the
> > > Yahoo!
> > > Terms of Service.
> > >
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------
> >   YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
> >
> >
> >     Visit your group "prezveepsenator" on the web.
> >
> >     To unsubscribe from this group, send an email
> to:
> >  prezveepsenator-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> >
> >     Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the
> Yahoo!
> > Terms of Service.
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------
>
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
>   YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
>
>
>     Visit your group "prezveepsenator" on the web.
>
>     To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>  prezveepsenator-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
>     Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo!
> Terms of Service.
>
>
> ---------------------------------

I don't know the details of Debs' prosecution, but I
recall reading that Coolidge eventually pardoned him.
And Debs did still get about a million votes in 1920,
though he was still in jail.

The best (and really only) book I've read on the use
of the Espionage Act was the second volume of Emma
Goldman's autobiography. As an immigrant, she was not
only jailed but also deported to the Soviet Union
(which she'd left in the 1880s) and never allowed to
return to America, all because she'd made speeches
against the war and against the draft. Thousands were
deported at the same time as her. I recall that her
anger was more directed at Wilson's attorney general
than at Wilson himself.

--- THOMAS JOHNSON <AVRCRDNG@...> wrote:
> I have read that Wilson was prone to use
> the threat of prosecution of  sedition as a
> political
> tool and was not above using propaganda. I'm curious
> whether that it is   reasonable to assume that Deb's
> incarceration under the Espionage Act was an attempt
> to lessen his impact on the 1920 race.
> I found the image of a weeping Taft being the last
> to
> leave TR's grave site pretty touching, and the fact
> that TR delivered a 50 minute speech, immediately
> after taking a bullet in the chest, astounding.
>
> Tom Johnson
>
>
>
>
> --- Ram Lau <ramlau@...> wrote:
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Because of his deep sense of fairness and equality
> that the original
> Republican Party embraced, Taft made a superb
> Supreme
> Court Chief
> Justice. I find it impossible to picture what kind
> of
> Justice Bush or
> Cheney would be, but I pray to God (and I only
> bother
> God when
> necessary) that a Justice Bush/Cheney will never
> happen to mankind.
>
> The 1912 election was a critical election. The
> Democratic Party for
> the first time experienced the progressive elements
> that Woodrow
> Wilson and William Jennings Bryan embraced, while
> the
> Republican Party
> began to turn from a center-left party to something
> totally different
> half a century later. Here is the transcript of the
> BookTV interview
> with the author of the book "1912: Wilson,
> Roosevelt,
> Taft, and Debs -
> The Election That Changed the Country," a very
> readable book:
>
>
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/prezveepsenator/message/192
>
> Ram
>
>
> --- In prezveepsenator@yahoogroups.com, THOMAS
> JOHNSON
> <AVRCRDNG@F...>
> wrote:
> > Greg and Ram and all, thanks for the responses and
> > welcoming me into the group. I have entertained
> the
> > notion that perhaps the Taft presidency was the
> most
> > analogous to our current inhabitant. He was born
> into
> > political privilege, divisive, pious,
> > anti-environment, and a pawn of the party
> machinery
> > (TR claimed they stole the 1912 Republican
> > nomination). I also  would have included a puppet
> of
> > big business, but after doing a little reading
> > tonight, he apparently  did some trust-busting. He
> > seems to have had a pretty good post-presidency,
> > including serving on the US Supreme Court. I also
> find
> > it heartening that he and TR, who had been close
> > friends( Taft was TR's hand-picked successor), and
>
> > were able to have an amicable lunch together
> before
> > the latter's death , significant in  that in  the
> 1912
> > primaries terms such as 'fathead' and 'congenital
> > liar' were thrown at each other.
> >  I caught a bit of the Carl Sferrazza Anthony
> Cspan
> > interview on the subject of Nellie Taft  that Ram
> > alluded to and  came away with feeling that she
> was
> > pretty cool..thanks Ram for the link to see the
> whole
> > segment and for the great Coolidge interview, the
> Debs
> > profile and for answering my question. I'm
> learning
> a
> > lot form you guys.
> >
> > Tom Johnson
> >
> > --- Greg Cannon <gregcannon1@y...> wrote:
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------
> > I can't answer your question, Tom, though I'd also
> > like to know the answer. Do you or anyone here
> have
> > suggestions on books or websites to do with the
> Taft
> > administration? The Roosevelt biography I'm
> reading
> > has been mentioning Taft a lot, how Teddy began
> > sending him on important missions and taking Taft
> into
> > his confidence, at least as early as 1905 though
> > probably earlier.
> >
> > Roosevelt's occasional anti-trust prosecutions of
> > monopolies raised quite a storm in his first term,
> but
> > he never went as far as the progressives wanted,
> and
> > he angered progressives by insisting on "open
> shops"
> > among government employees.
> >
> > I'd like to see a similar reaction by the
> progressive
> > movement now, as you mention, but how would that
> come
> > about? Right now progressives seem to be very much
> on
> > the defense.
> >
> > --- THOMAS JOHNSON <AVRCRDNG@F...> wrote:
> >
> > > I'm really enjoying the posting from this group
> and
> > > am
> > > curious if anyone thinks the progressive
> advances
> > > that
> > >  were developing around 100 years ago, such as
> > > suffrage and shorter workdays,  were due at
> least
> in
> > > part to a backlash against the robber barons and
> the
> > > Taft administration. It would give me hope if a
> > > pious,
> > >  pro big business president such as Taft
> inspired
> > > the
> > > progressive movement to rebel and  a similar
> > > reaction
> > > could repeat itself a century later.
> > >
> > > Tom Johnson
> > >
> > > --- Greg Cannon <gregcannon1@y...> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------
> > > I agree with you, but I fear that if taken too
> far
> > > then the party's message might become only
> marketing
> > > and packaging, with a great lack of substance.
> At
> > > the
> > > moment though the Democrats seem to be lacking
> on
> > > both
> > > accounts. They never fully committed to either
> > > opposing or supporting Bush's foreign policy and
> his
> > > policies on civil rights, and they failed
> miserably
> > > when they attempted to explain their ambivalence
> to
>
=== message truncated ===

Your mention of Emma Goldman reminds me Ayn Rand, surely a very
different personality. (Ann Coulter of her generation?) I sometimes
wonder if the Red Scare had anything to do with the imprisonment.

Ram


--- In prezveepsenator@yahoogroups.com, Greg Cannon <gregcannon1@y...>
wrote:
> I don't know the details of Debs' prosecution, but I
> recall reading that Coolidge eventually pardoned him.
> And Debs did still get about a million votes in 1920,
> though he was still in jail.
>
> The best (and really only) book I've read on the use
> of the Espionage Act was the second volume of Emma
> Goldman's autobiography. As an immigrant, she was not
> only jailed but also deported to the Soviet Union
> (which she'd left in the 1880s) and never allowed to
> return to America, all because she'd made speeches
> against the war and against the draft. Thousands were
> deported at the same time as her. I recall that her
> anger was more directed at Wilson's attorney general
> than at Wilson himself.
>
> --- THOMAS JOHNSON <AVRCRDNG@F...> wrote:
> > I have read that Wilson was prone to use
> > the threat of prosecution of  sedition as a
> > political
> > tool and was not above using propaganda. I'm curious
> > whether that it is   reasonable to assume that Deb's
> > incarceration under the Espionage Act was an attempt
> > to lessen his impact on the 1920 race.
> > I found the image of a weeping Taft being the last
> > to
> > leave TR's grave site pretty touching, and the fact
> > that TR delivered a 50 minute speech, immediately
> > after taking a bullet in the chest, astounding.
> >
> > Tom Johnson
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --- Ram Lau <ramlau@y...> wrote:
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------
> > Because of his deep sense of fairness and equality
> > that the original
> > Republican Party embraced, Taft made a superb
> > Supreme
> > Court Chief
> > Justice. I find it impossible to picture what kind
> > of
> > Justice Bush or
> > Cheney would be, but I pray to God (and I only
> > bother
> > God when
> > necessary) that a Justice Bush/Cheney will never
> > happen to mankind.
> >
> > The 1912 election was a critical election. The
> > Democratic Party for
> > the first time experienced the progressive elements
> > that Woodrow
> > Wilson and William Jennings Bryan embraced, while
> > the
> > Republican Party
> > began to turn from a center-left party to something
> > totally different
> > half a century later. Here is the transcript of the
> > BookTV interview
> > with the author of the book "1912: Wilson,
> > Roosevelt,
> > Taft, and Debs -
> > The Election That Changed the Country," a very
> > readable book:
> >
> >
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/prezveepsenator/message/192
> >
> > Ram
> >
> >
> > --- In prezveepsenator@yahoogroups.com, THOMAS
> > JOHNSON
> > <AVRCRDNG@F...>
> > wrote:
> > > Greg and Ram and all, thanks for the responses and
> > > welcoming me into the group. I have entertained
> > the
> > > notion that perhaps the Taft presidency was the
> > most
> > > analogous to our current inhabitant. He was born
> > into
> > > political privilege, divisive, pious,
> > > anti-environment, and a pawn of the party
> > machinery
> > > (TR claimed they stole the 1912 Republican
> > > nomination). I also  would have included a puppet
> > of
> > > big business, but after doing a little reading
> > > tonight, he apparently  did some trust-busting. He
> > > seems to have had a pretty good post-presidency,
> > > including serving on the US Supreme Court. I also
> > find
> > > it heartening that he and TR, who had been close
> > > friends( Taft was TR's hand-picked successor), and
> >
> > > were able to have an amicable lunch together
> > before
> > > the latter's death , significant in  that in  the
> > 1912
> > > primaries terms such as 'fathead' and 'congenital
> > > liar' were thrown at each other.
> > >  I caught a bit of the Carl Sferrazza Anthony
> > Cspan
> > > interview on the subject of Nellie Taft  that Ram
> > > alluded to and  came away with feeling that she
> > was
> > > pretty cool..thanks Ram for the link to see the
> > whole
> > > segment and for the great Coolidge interview, the
> > Debs
> > > profile and for answering my question. I'm
> > learning
> > a
> > > lot form you guys.
> > >
> > > Tom Johnson
> > >
> > > --- Greg Cannon <gregcannon1@y...> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------
> > > I can't answer your question, Tom, though I'd also
> > > like to know the answer. Do you or anyone here
> > have
> > > suggestions on books or websites to do with the
> > Taft
> > > administration? The Roosevelt biography I'm
> > reading
> > > has been mentioning Taft a lot, how Teddy began
> > > sending him on important missions and taking Taft
> > into
> > > his confidence, at least as early as 1905 though
> > > probably earlier.
> > >
> > > Roosevelt's occasional anti-trust prosecutions of
> > > monopolies raised quite a storm in his first term,
> > but
> > > he never went as far as the progressives wanted,
> > and
> > > he angered progressives by insisting on "open
> > shops"
> > > among government employees.
> > >
> > > I'd like to see a similar reaction by the
> > progressive
> > > movement now, as you mention, but how would that
> > come
> > > about? Right now progressives seem to be very much
> > on
> > > the defense.
> > >
> > > --- THOMAS JOHNSON <AVRCRDNG@F...> wrote:
> > >
> > > > I'm really enjoying the posting from this group
> > and
> > > > am
> > > > curious if anyone thinks the progressive
> > advances
> > > > that
> > > >  were developing around 100 years ago, such as
> > > > suffrage and shorter workdays,  were due at
> > least
> > in
> > > > part to a backlash against the robber barons and
> > the
> > > > Taft administration. It would give me hope if a
> > > > pious,
> > > >  pro big business president such as Taft
> > inspired
> > > > the
> > > > progressive movement to rebel and  a similar
> > > > reaction
> > > > could repeat itself a century later.
> > > >
> > > > Tom Johnson
> > > >
> > > > --- Greg Cannon <gregcannon1@y...> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ---------------------------------
> > > > I agree with you, but I fear that if taken too
> > far
> > > > then the party's message might become only
> > marketing
> > > > and packaging, with a great lack of substance.
> > At
> > > > the
> > > > moment though the Democrats seem to be lacking
> > on
> > > > both
> > > > accounts. They never fully committed to either
> > > > opposing or supporting Bush's foreign policy and
> > his
> > > > policies on civil rights, and they failed
> > miserably
> > > > when they attempted to explain their ambivalence
> > to
> >
> === message truncated ===

I forgot to mention that everyone was using cocaine legally in that
"progressive" era. :-)

Ram

I have vague knowledge of Rand's writings and
philosophy. I think they both believed in what they
thought of as libertarianism, but had very different
views on what exactly that was. Goldman's allies were
nearly always on the left. She had many friends who
were socialist and communist, though she'd always
disagree with them on many things. I think the main
thing they agreed on was that private property should
be done away with, and that's one thing I'm sure Rand
would disagree with them on. Goldman also joined them
on more down-to-earth causes, like birth control. She
delivered lectures on birth control, and apparently
condoms were distributed at her lectures though birth
control devices like that weren't legal at the time.

I don't know much about Rand's personal life. Was she
as passionate about her beliefs as Goldman was? What
was she like? For that matter, when did she live?

--- Ram Lau <ramlau@...> wrote:

> Your mention of Emma Goldman reminds me Ayn Rand,
> surely a very
> different personality. (Ann Coulter of her
> generation?) I sometimes
> wonder if the Red Scare had anything to do with the
> imprisonment.
>
> Ram
>
>
> --- In prezveepsenator@yahoogroups.com, Greg Cannon
> <gregcannon1@y...>
> wrote:
> > I don't know the details of Debs' prosecution, but
> I
> > recall reading that Coolidge eventually pardoned
> him.
> > And Debs did still get about a million votes in
> 1920,
> > though he was still in jail.
> >
> > The best (and really only) book I've read on the
> use
> > of the Espionage Act was the second volume of Emma
> > Goldman's autobiography. As an immigrant, she was
> not
> > only jailed but also deported to the Soviet Union
> > (which she'd left in the 1880s) and never allowed
> to
> > return to America, all because she'd made speeches
> > against the war and against the draft. Thousands
> were
> > deported at the same time as her. I recall that
> her
> > anger was more directed at Wilson's attorney
> general
> > than at Wilson himself.
> >
> > --- THOMAS JOHNSON <AVRCRDNG@F...> wrote:
> > > I have read that Wilson was prone to use
> > > the threat of prosecution of  sedition as a
> > > political
> > > tool and was not above using propaganda. I'm
> curious
> > > whether that it is   reasonable to assume that
> Deb's
> > > incarceration under the Espionage Act was an
> attempt
> > > to lessen his impact on the 1920 race.
> > > I found the image of a weeping Taft being the
> last
> > > to
> > > leave TR's grave site pretty touching, and the
> fact
> > > that TR delivered a 50 minute speech,
> immediately
> > > after taking a bullet in the chest, astounding.
> > >
> > > Tom Johnson
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --- Ram Lau <ramlau@y...> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------
> > > Because of his deep sense of fairness and
> equality
> > > that the original
> > > Republican Party embraced, Taft made a superb
> > > Supreme
> > > Court Chief
> > > Justice. I find it impossible to picture what
> kind
> > > of
> > > Justice Bush or
> > > Cheney would be, but I pray to God (and I only
> > > bother
> > > God when
> > > necessary) that a Justice Bush/Cheney will never
> > > happen to mankind.
> > >
> > > The 1912 election was a critical election. The
> > > Democratic Party for
> > > the first time experienced the progressive
> elements
> > > that Woodrow
> > > Wilson and William Jennings Bryan embraced,
> while
> > > the
> > > Republican Party
> > > began to turn from a center-left party to
> something
> > > totally different
> > > half a century later. Here is the transcript of
> the
> > > BookTV interview
> > > with the author of the book "1912: Wilson,
> > > Roosevelt,
> > > Taft, and Debs -
> > > The Election That Changed the Country," a very
> > > readable book:
> > >
> > >
> >
>
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/prezveepsenator/message/192
> > >
> > > Ram
> > >
> > >
> > > --- In prezveepsenator@yahoogroups.com, THOMAS
> > > JOHNSON
> > > <AVRCRDNG@F...>
> > > wrote:
> > > > Greg and Ram and all, thanks for the responses
> and
> > > > welcoming me into the group. I have
> entertained
> > > the
> > > > notion that perhaps the Taft presidency was
> the
> > > most
> > > > analogous to our current inhabitant. He was
> born
> > > into
> > > > political privilege, divisive, pious,
> > > > anti-environment, and a pawn of the party
> > > machinery
> > > > (TR claimed they stole the 1912 Republican
> > > > nomination). I also  would have included a
> puppet
> > > of
> > > > big business, but after doing a little reading
> > > > tonight, he apparently  did some
> trust-busting. He
> > > > seems to have had a pretty good
> post-presidency,
> > > > including serving on the US Supreme Court. I
> also
> > > find
> > > > it heartening that he and TR, who had been
> close
> > > > friends( Taft was TR's hand-picked successor),
> and
> > >
> > > > were able to have an amicable lunch together
> > > before
> > > > the latter's death , significant in  that in
> the
> > > 1912
> > > > primaries terms such as 'fathead' and
> 'congenital
> > > > liar' were thrown at each other.
> > > >  I caught a bit of the Carl Sferrazza Anthony
> > > Cspan
> > > > interview on the subject of Nellie Taft  that
> Ram
> > > > alluded to and  came away with feeling that
> she
> > > was
> > > > pretty cool..thanks Ram for the link to see
> the
> > > whole
> > > > segment and for the great Coolidge interview,
> the
> > > Debs
> > > > profile and for answering my question. I'm
> > > learning
> > > a
> > > > lot form you guys.
> > > >
> > > > Tom Johnson
> > > >
> > > > --- Greg Cannon <gregcannon1@y...> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ---------------------------------
> > > > I can't answer your question, Tom, though I'd
> also
> > > > like to know the answer. Do you or anyone here
> > > have
> > > > suggestions on books or websites to do with
> the
> > > Taft
> > > > administration? The Roosevelt biography I'm
> > > reading
> > > > has been mentioning Taft a lot, how Teddy
> began
> > > > sending him on important missions and taking
> Taft
> > > into
> > > > his confidence, at least as early as 1905
> though
> > > > probably earlier.
> > > >
> > > > Roosevelt's occasional anti-trust prosecutions
> of
> > > > monopolies raised quite a storm in his first
> term,
> > > but
>
=== message truncated ===

http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-bushread16aug16,0,2499888.s\
tory?coll=ny-leadnationalnews-headlines

From the Los Angeles Times
THE NATION
Bush Salts His Summer With Eclectic Reading List
He is tackling three historical sagas while on
vacation, impressing even the authors.

By Warren Vieth
Times Staff Writer

August 16, 2005

CRAWFORD, Texas — Gas prices are climbing, motorists
are fuming and President Bush is at his ranch with a
book about the history of salt.

There could be a connection.

According to the White House, one of three books Bush
chose to read on his five-week vacation is "Salt: A
World History" by Mark Kurlansky, who chronicled the
rise and fall of what once was considered the world's
most strategic commodity.

The other two books he reportedly brought to Crawford
are "Alexander II: The Last Great Tsar" by Edvard
Radzinsky and "The Great Influenza: The Epic Story of
the Deadliest Plague in History" by John M. Barry.

Bush, a former oil company chief, has not said why he
picked Kurlansky's 484-page saga. "The president
enjoys reading and learning about history," White
House spokeswoman Dana Perino said.

But the analogies between salt and oil are striking.

For most of recorded history, salt was synonymous with
wealth. It established trade routes and cities.
Adventurers searched for it. Merchants hoarded it.
Governments taxed it. Nations went to war over it.

More than four centuries ago, Queen Elizabeth I warned
of England's growing dependence on foreign salt.
France's salt tax, the gabelle, was one of the
grievances that gave rise to the Revolution of 1789.

Then, in the early 20th century, salt became
ubiquitous. Refrigeration reduced its value as a
preservative, and geological advances revealed its
global abundance.

"It seems very silly now, all of the struggles for
salt," Kurlansky said. "It's quite probable that some
day, people will read about our struggles for oil and
have the same reaction."

Kurlansky said he was surprised to hear that Bush had
taken his book to the ranch: "My first reaction was,
'Oh, he reads books?' "

The author said he was a "virulent Bush opponent" who
had given speeches denouncing the war in Iraq.

"What I find fascinating, and it's probably a positive
thing about the White House, is they don't seem to do
any research about the writers when they pick the
books," Kurlansky said.

Barry, author of "The Great Influenza," said that he
too had been a Bush critic. But his views have not
deterred the administration from seeking his advice on
the potential for another pandemic like the 1918
outbreak that claimed millions of lives worldwide.

Although Barry was not aware that the president
planned to read the book, he said he had been
consulting off and on with senior administration
officials since its release in February 2004. He had
lunch with Health and Human Services Secretary Mike
Leavitt two weeks ago.

The administration, Barry said, was investigating what
steps public officials could take to lessen the
severity of a flu pandemic. A central theme of Barry's
book is that the 1918 outbreak was exacerbated in
America by the government's attempts to minimize its
significance, partly to avoid undermining efforts to
prevail in World War I.

"One lesson is to absolutely take it seriously," Barry
said. "I'm not a great fan of the Bush administration,
but I think they are doing that. The Clinton
administration I don't think paid much attention to it
as a threat."

Bush's choice of "Alexander II" appears to reflect his
interest in books about transformational political
leaders. Among those he has perused since becoming
president are biographies of George Washington, John
Adams, Alexander Hamilton, Theodore Roosevelt, Richard
the Lionheart and Peter the Great.

But Radzinsky's portrait of Alexander II may have
special relevance to Bush, who obtained an advance
copy of the English translation scheduled for
publication in November. Alexander II, who ruled
Russia from 1855 to 1881, was known as the "Czar
Liberator" because he freed 23 million Russian slaves
in 1861, two years before Abraham Lincoln signed the
Emancipation Proclamation.

But his governmental reforms ultimately were his
undoing. On the right, they provoked a conservative
backlash. On the left, they contributed to a radical
political movement that used targeted violence to
accomplish its aims, including a wave of killings and
bombings.

When he decided to halt the reform process, the
violence intensified. Alexander II became, in effect,
the first world leader to declare a war on terrorism.
He would not be the last.

"We, Russia, created the first great terrorist
organization in the world," Radzinsky said in a phone
interview from Moscow. "We are the father of terror,
not Muslims."

After surviving six attempts on his life, Alexander II
was assassinated by a group of anarchists who tossed
home-made bombs at the emperor as he was riding in his
carriage on the streets of St. Petersburg. They had
plotted the attack for weeks, operating out of an
apartment across the hall from the writer Fyodor
Dostoyevsky.

Radzinsky said he assumed Bush had drawn the
connection to the terrorists of today. "Very noble
young people who dreamed about the future of Russia
became killers, because blood destroys souls,"
Radzinsky said. "That for me is the most important
lesson."

Bush has incorporated some of the books he has read
into administration policy and his own political
philosophy. Perhaps the best-known example is "The
Case for Democracy," a book by former Soviet dissident
and current Israeli Cabinet member Natan Sharansky.

Sharansky's book is a treatise on the power of freedom
to overcome tyranny and expresses the view that
democratic governments should pressure authoritarian
regimes to pursue reforms instead of accepting them as
they are.

After receiving a copy of the book last year, Bush
invited Sharansky to the White House; the president
began recommending the book to friends, staffers and
journalists. The themes espoused by Sharansky started
appearing in the president's remarks on foreign policy
and national security, including this year's inaugural
speech and State of the Union address.

Peter Osnos, whose PublicAffairs publishing house in
New York released the U.S. version of "The Case for
Democracy," said that the books Bush brought with him
to Crawford represented a sophisticated reading list,
even for an intellectually curious chief executive.

"It's a fair bet that George W. Bush is the only
person in the entire United States who chose those
three books to read on vacation," Osnos said.

"There's nothing on that list that is a beach read, or
even a busman's holiday," he said. "He's not reading
any of the contemporary political books. He's not
reading the hatchet job on Hillary Clinton."

Greg,

Rand has plenty of fans. They've even set up the Ayn Rand Institute in
her name a decade ago:

http://www.aynrand.org/

She's the Milton Friedman of her era:

"Ayn Rand (1905-1982) was an ardent advocate of reason, rational
self-interest, individual rights and free-market capitalism.

ARI seeks to promote these principles, spearheading a "cultural
renaissance" that will reverse the anti-reason, anti-individualism,
anti-freedom, anti-capitalist trends in today's culture. The major
battleground in this fight for reason and capitalism is the
educational institutions—high schools, and above all, the
universities, where students learn the ideas that shape their lives.

Ayn Rand's philosophy—known as Objectivism—holds that historical
trends are the inescapable product of philosophy. To reverse the
current political and economic trends in America and throughout the
world requires a reversal of our society's fundamental philosophy."

Ram


--- In prezveepsenator@yahoogroups.com, Greg Cannon <gregcannon1@y...>
wrote:
> I have vague knowledge of Rand's writings and
> philosophy. I think they both believed in what they
> thought of as libertarianism, but had very different
> views on what exactly that was. Goldman's allies were
> nearly always on the left. She had many friends who
> were socialist and communist, though she'd always
> disagree with them on many things. I think the main
> thing they agreed on was that private property should
> be done away with, and that's one thing I'm sure Rand
> would disagree with them on. Goldman also joined them
> on more down-to-earth causes, like birth control. She
> delivered lectures on birth control, and apparently
> condoms were distributed at her lectures though birth
> control devices like that weren't legal at the time.
>
> I don't know much about Rand's personal life. Was she
> as passionate about her beliefs as Goldman was? What
> was she like? For that matter, when did she live?
>
> --- Ram Lau <ramlau@y...> wrote:
>
> > Your mention of Emma Goldman reminds me Ayn Rand,
> > surely a very
> > different personality. (Ann Coulter of her
> > generation?) I sometimes
> > wonder if the Red Scare had anything to do with the
> > imprisonment.
> >
> > Ram
> >
> >
> > --- In prezveepsenator@yahoogroups.com, Greg Cannon
> > <gregcannon1@y...>
> > wrote:
> > > I don't know the details of Debs' prosecution, but
> > I
> > > recall reading that Coolidge eventually pardoned
> > him.
> > > And Debs did still get about a million votes in
> > 1920,
> > > though he was still in jail.
> > >
> > > The best (and really only) book I've read on the
> > use
> > > of the Espionage Act was the second volume of Emma
> > > Goldman's autobiography. As an immigrant, she was
> > not
> > > only jailed but also deported to the Soviet Union
> > > (which she'd left in the 1880s) and never allowed
> > to
> > > return to America, all because she'd made speeches
> > > against the war and against the draft. Thousands
> > were
> > > deported at the same time as her. I recall that
> > her
> > > anger was more directed at Wilson's attorney
> > general
> > > than at Wilson himself.
> > >
> > > --- THOMAS JOHNSON <AVRCRDNG@F...> wrote:
> > > > I have read that Wilson was prone to use
> > > > the threat of prosecution of  sedition as a
> > > > political
> > > > tool and was not above using propaganda. I'm
> > curious
> > > > whether that it is   reasonable to assume that
> > Deb's
> > > > incarceration under the Espionage Act was an
> > attempt
> > > > to lessen his impact on the 1920 race.
> > > > I found the image of a weeping Taft being the
> > last
> > > > to
> > > > leave TR's grave site pretty touching, and the
> > fact
> > > > that TR delivered a 50 minute speech,
> > immediately
> > > > after taking a bullet in the chest, astounding.
> > > >
> > > > Tom Johnson
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --- Ram Lau <ramlau@y...> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ---------------------------------
> > > > Because of his deep sense of fairness and
> > equality
> > > > that the original
> > > > Republican Party embraced, Taft made a superb
> > > > Supreme
> > > > Court Chief
> > > > Justice. I find it impossible to picture what
> > kind
> > > > of
> > > > Justice Bush or
> > > > Cheney would be, but I pray to God (and I only
> > > > bother
> > > > God when
> > > > necessary) that a Justice Bush/Cheney will never
> > > > happen to mankind.
> > > >
> > > > The 1912 election was a critical election. The
> > > > Democratic Party for
> > > > the first time experienced the progressive
> > elements
> > > > that Woodrow
> > > > Wilson and William Jennings Bryan embraced,
> > while
> > > > the
> > > > Republican Party
> > > > began to turn from a center-left party to
> > something
> > > > totally different
> > > > half a century later. Here is the transcript of
> > the
> > > > BookTV interview
> > > > with the author of the book "1912: Wilson,
> > > > Roosevelt,
> > > > Taft, and Debs -
> > > > The Election That Changed the Country," a very
> > > > readable book:
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/prezveepsenator/message/192
> > > >
> > > > Ram
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --- In prezveepsenator@yahoogroups.com, THOMAS
> > > > JOHNSON
> > > > <AVRCRDNG@F...>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > Greg and Ram and all, thanks for the responses
> > and
> > > > > welcoming me into the group. I have
> > entertained
> > > > the
> > > > > notion that perhaps the Taft presidency was
> > the
> > > > most
> > > > > analogous to our current inhabitant. He was
> > born
> > > > into
> > > > > political privilege, divisive, pious,
> > > > > anti-environment, and a pawn of the party
> > > > machinery
> > > > > (TR claimed they stole the 1912 Republican
> > > > > nomination). I also  would have included a
> > puppet
> > > > of
> > > > > big business, but after doing a little reading
> > > > > tonight, he apparently  did some
> > trust-busting. He
> > > > > seems to have had a pretty good
> > post-presidency,
> > > > > including serving on the US Supreme Court. I
> > also
> > > > find
> > > > > it heartening that he and TR, who had been
> > close
> > > > > friends( Taft was TR's hand-picked successor),
> > and
> > > >
> > > > > were able to have an amicable lunch together
> > > > before
> > > > > the latter's death , significant in  that in
> > the
> > > > 1912
> > > > > primaries terms such as 'fathead' and
> > 'congenital
> > > > > liar' were thrown at each other.
> > > > >  I caught a bit of the Carl Sferrazza Anthony
> > > > Cspan
> > > > > interview on the subject of Nellie Taft  that
> > Ram
> > > > > alluded to and  came away with feeling that
> > she
> > > > was
> > > > > pretty cool..thanks Ram for the link to see
> > the
> > > > whole
> > > > > segment and for the great Coolidge interview,
> > the
> > > > Debs
> > > > > profile and for answering my question. I'm
> > > > learning
> > > > a
> > > > > lot form you guys.
> > > > >
> > > > > Tom Johnson
> > > > >
> > > > > --- Greg Cannon <gregcannon1@y...> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > ---------------------------------
> > > > > I can't answer your question, Tom, though I'd
> > also
> > > > > like to know the answer. Do you or anyone here
> > > > have
> > > > > suggestions on books or websites to do with
> > the
> > > > Taft
> > > > > administration? The Roosevelt biography I'm
> > > > reading
> > > > > has been mentioning Taft a lot, how Teddy
> > began
> > > > > sending him on important missions and taking
> > Taft
> > > > into
> > > > > his confidence, at least as early as 1905
> > though
> > > > > probably earlier.
> > > > >
> > > > > Roosevelt's occasional anti-trust prosecutions
> > of
> > > > > monopolies raised quite a storm in his first
> > term,
> > > > but
> >
> === message truncated ===

While  reading about the Harding administration and
the Teapot Dome
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teapot_Dome   scandal, I
became re-acquainted with Fightin' Bob LaFollette
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_M._La_Follette%2C_Sr.,
   who's primary association for me was as a thorn in
Wilson's side. Although Harding was very popular and
the scandal had lost the public's interest, Republican
LaFollette kept investigating through a Senate
committee, with Democrat Thomas Walsh as point man.
Eventually the lies did not hold up, resulting in
imprisonment, suicides, and a disgraced
administration.
Fast forward 60 years to the Reagan administration and
the Iran-Contra scandal
://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran-Contra_Affair   This
administration illegally traded arms for hostages,
with disastrous results reverberating even today.
Special prosecutor Walsh (ironically) granted immunity
to some key figures and everybody walked. Far from re
penitent, House Republicans impeached Bill Clinton,
according to Representative Dana Rohrabacher R-Cal,
primarily as payback for to the Democrats for pursuing
Iran-Contra in the first place.
In my opinion, Reagan did far more damage to our long
term interests than Harding, yet Reagan is ranked the
11th best president  in Cspan's Survey of Presidential
Leadership Survey
http://www.americanpresidents.org/survey/historians/,
comprised of prominent presidential historians, and
Harding is ranked 40th of 41.
How different things might have been if Bob LaFollette
had towed the party line or if Lawrence Walsh had not.

Tom Johnson
--- Ram Lau <ramlau@...> wrote:


---------------------------------
Greg,

Rand has plenty of fans. They've even set up the Ayn
Rand Institute in
her name a decade ago:

http://www.aynrand.org/

She's the Milton Friedman of her era:

"Ayn Rand (1905-1982) was an ardent advocate of
reason, rational
self-interest, individual rights and free-market
capitalism.

ARI seeks to promote these principles, spearheading a
"cultural
renaissance" that will reverse the anti-reason,
anti-individualism,
anti-freedom, anti-capitalist trends in today's
culture. The major
battleground in this fight for reason and capitalism
is the
educational institutions—high schools, and above all,
the
universities, where students learn the ideas that
shape their lives.

Ayn Rand's philosophy—known as Objectivism—holds that
historical
trends are the inescapable product of philosophy. To
reverse the
current political and economic trends in America and
throughout the
world requires a reversal of our society's fundamental
philosophy."

Ram


--- In prezveepsenator@yahoogroups.com, Greg Cannon
<gregcannon1@y...>
wrote:
> I have vague knowledge of Rand's writings and
> philosophy. I think they both believed in what they
> thought of as libertarianism, but had very different
> views on what exactly that was. Goldman's allies
were
> nearly always on the left. She had many friends who
> were socialist and communist, though she'd always
> disagree with them on many things. I think the main
> thing they agreed on was that private property
should
> be done away with, and that's one thing I'm sure
Rand
> would disagree with them on. Goldman also joined
them
> on more down-to-earth causes, like birth control.
She
> delivered lectures on birth control, and apparently
> condoms were distributed at her lectures though
birth
> control devices like that weren't legal at the time.
>
> I don't know much about Rand's personal life. Was
she
> as passionate about her beliefs as Goldman was? What
> was she like? For that matter, when did she live?
>
> --- Ram Lau <ramlau@y...> wrote:
>
> > Your mention of Emma Goldman reminds me Ayn Rand,
> > surely a very
> > different personality. (Ann Coulter of her
> > generation?) I sometimes
> > wonder if the Red Scare had anything to do with
the
> > imprisonment.
> >
> > Ram
> >
> >
> > --- In prezveepsenator@yahoogroups.com, Greg
Cannon
> > <gregcannon1@y...>
> > wrote:
> > > I don't know the details of Debs' prosecution,
but
> > I
> > > recall reading that Coolidge eventually pardoned
> > him.
> > > And Debs did still get about a million votes in
> > 1920,
> > > though he was still in jail.
> > >
> > > The best (and really only) book I've read on the
> > use
> > > of the Espionage Act was the second volume of
Emma
> > > Goldman's autobiography. As an immigrant, she
was
> > not
> > > only jailed but also deported to the Soviet
Union
> > > (which she'd left in the 1880s) and never
allowed
> > to
> > > return to America, all because she'd made
speeches
> > > against the war and against the draft. Thousands
> > were
> > > deported at the same time as her. I recall that
> > her
> > > anger was more directed at Wilson's attorney
> > general
> > > than at Wilson himself.
> > >
> > > --- THOMAS JOHNSON <AVRCRDNG@F...> wrote:
> > > > I have read that Wilson was prone to use
> > > > the threat of prosecution of  sedition as a
> > > > political
> > > > tool and was not above using propaganda. I'm
> > curious
> > > > whether that it is   reasonable to assume that
> > Deb's
> > > > incarceration under the Espionage Act was an
> > attempt
> > > > to lessen his impact on the 1920 race.
> > > > I found the image of a weeping Taft being the
> > last
> > > > to
> > > > leave TR's grave site pretty touching, and the
> > fact
> > > > that TR delivered a 50 minute speech,
> > immediately
> > > > after taking a bullet in the chest,
astounding.
> > > >
> > > > Tom Johnson
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --- Ram Lau <ramlau@y...> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ---------------------------------
> > > > Because of his deep sense of fairness and
> > equality
> > > > that the original
> > > > Republican Party embraced, Taft made a superb
> > > > Supreme
> > > > Court Chief
> > > > Justice. I find it impossible to picture what
> > kind
> > > > of
> > > > Justice Bush or
> > > > Cheney would be, but I pray to God (and I only
> > > > bother
> > > > God when
> > > > necessary) that a Justice Bush/Cheney will
never
> > > > happen to mankind.
> > > >
> > > > The 1912 election was a critical election. The
> > > > Democratic Party for
> > > > the first time experienced the progressive
> > elements
> > > > that Woodrow
> > > > Wilson and William Jennings Bryan embraced,
> > while
> > > > the
> > > > Republican Party
> > > > began to turn from a center-left party to
> > something
> > > > totally different
> > > > half a century later. Here is the transcript
of
> > the
> > > > BookTV interview
> > > > with the author of the book "1912: Wilson,
> > > > Roosevelt,
> > > > Taft, and Debs -
> > > > The Election That Changed the Country," a very
> > > > readable book:
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/prezveepsenator/message/192
> > > >
> > > > Ram
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --- In prezveepsenator@yahoogroups.com, THOMAS
> > > > JOHNSON
> > > > <AVRCRDNG@F...>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > Greg and Ram and all, thanks for the
responses
> > and
> > > > > welcoming me into the group. I have
> > entertained
> > > > the
> > > > > notion that perhaps the Taft presidency was
> > the
> > > > most
> > > > > analogous to our current inhabitant. He was
> > born
> > > > into
> > > > > political privilege, divisive, pious,
> > > > > anti-environment, and a pawn of the party
> > > > machinery
> > > > > (TR claimed they stole the 1912 Republican
> > > > > nomination). I also  would have included a
> > puppet
> > > > of
> > > > > big business, but after doing a little
reading
> > > > > tonight, he apparently  did some
> > trust-busting. He
> > > > > seems to have had a pretty good
> > post-presidency,
> > > > > including serving on the US Supreme Court. I
> > also
> > > > find
> > > > > it heartening that he and TR, who had been
> > close
> > > > > friends( Taft was TR's hand-picked
successor),
> > and
> > > >
> > > > > were able to have an amicable lunch together
> > > > before
> > > > > the latter's death , significant in  that in

> > the
> > > > 1912
> > > > > primaries terms such as 'fathead' and
> > 'congenital
> > > > > liar' were thrown at each other.
> > > > >  I caught a bit of the Carl Sferrazza
Anthony
> > > > Cspan
> > > > > interview on the subject of Nellie Taft
that
> > Ram
> > > > > alluded to and  came away with feeling that
> > she
> > > > was
> > > > > pretty cool..thanks Ram for the link to see
> > the
> > > > whole
> > > > > segment and for the great Coolidge
interview,
> > the
> > > > Debs
> > > > > profile and for answering my question. I'm
> > > > learning
> > > > a
> > > > > lot form you guys.
> > > > >
> > > > > Tom Johnson
> > > > >
> > > > > --- Greg Cannon <gregcannon1@y...> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > ---------------------------------
> > > > > I can't answer your question, Tom, though
I'd
> > also
> > > > > like to know the answer. Do you or anyone
here
> > > > have
> > > > > suggestions on books or websites to do with
> > the
> > > > Taft
> > > > > administration? The Roosevelt biography I'm
> > > > reading
> > > > > has been mentioning Taft a lot, how Teddy
> > began
> > > > > sending him on important missions and taking
> > Taft
> > > > into
> > > > > his confidence, at least as early as 1905
> > though
> > > > > probably earlier.
> > > > >
> > > > > Roosevelt's occasional anti-trust
prosecutions
> > of
> > > > > monopolies raised quite a storm in his first
> > term,
> > > > but
> >
> === message truncated ===




---------------------------------
   YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS


     Visit your group "prezveepsenator" on the web.

     To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
  prezveepsenator-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

     Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo!
Terms of Service.


---------------------------------

I've also been reading about LaFollette. Here's an
interesting passage about him in Edmund Morris'
Theodore Rex (page 442). The dialogue described is
from 1906, when LaFollette was in his first term as
Senator.

    One of the weakest men in the Republican Party,
influentially speaking, visited Roosevelt late at
night to urge him to demand rates that were reasonable
as well as nondiscriminatory. Robert LaFollette had
been studying railroad finance for thirty years, and
thought that the President might listen to him on the
subject.
    "But you can't get any such bill as that through
Congress."
    "That is not the first consideration, Mr.
President."
    A fault line instantly ran between the idealist and
the practical politician. LaFollette did not see - or,
seeing, did not understand that it was already
unbridgeable, and must one day become a chasm.
    "But I want to get something through," Roosevelt
said.

--- THOMAS JOHNSON <AVRCRDNG@...> wrote:

> While  reading about the Harding administration and
> the Teapot Dome
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teapot_Dome   scandal,
> I
> became re-acquainted with Fightin' Bob LaFollette
>
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_M._La_Follette%2C_Sr.,
>   who's primary association for me was as a thorn in
> Wilson's side. Although Harding was very popular and
> the scandal had lost the public's interest,
> Republican
> LaFollette kept investigating through a Senate
> committee, with Democrat Thomas Walsh as point man.
> Eventually the lies did not hold up, resulting in
> imprisonment, suicides, and a disgraced
> administration.

http://today.reuters.com/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=politicsNews&storyID=2005-08\
-17T220842Z_01_HO779725_RTRIDST_0_POLITICS-CRIME-OHIO-GOVERNOR-DC.XML

Ohio gov. charged with criminal misdemeanors
Wed Aug 17, 2005 6:09 PM ET

COLUMBUS, Ohio (Reuters) - Prosecutors in Ohio charged
Gov. Bob Taft on Wednesday with four criminal
misdemeanor counts alleging violations of state ethics
laws for not reporting golf games and other outings
paid for by others.

The charges marked the first time an Ohio governor has
been charged with a crime while in office. A Taft
spokesman said the governor would not resign and would
have a statement on Thursday.

The charges against the Republican governor also
marked another step in a still-unfolding scandal
dubbed "Coingate" that involves $13 million in missing
state funds and a top Ohio Republican fund-raiser.

Stephen McIntosh, chief prosecutor for the Columbus
city attorney, said most of the outings involved golf
but also included meals and tickets to see the
Columbus Blue Jackets hockey team.

The undeclared amounts totaled a little less than
$6,000, McIntosh said. The governor subsequently
notified state ethics commission officials about the
outings that had been omitted in previous filings of
yearly disclosure forms. McIntosh said the governor is
required to report gifts or benefits of $75 or more.

Prosecutors were asking that Taft appear in court on
Thursday morning, though if he chooses to enter a not
guilty plea only his lawyer would have to be present,
he said.

If found guilty, he faces fines of $1,000 and six
months in jail on each count, though jail time was
considered unlikely.

McIntosh said the probe of Taft grew out of an
investigation into fund-raiser Tom Noe and the state's
Bureau of Workers Compensation.

Last month, Taft's former chief of staff was found
guilty of violating ethics laws by not disclosing
gifts from Noe, who is at the heart of the Coingate
scandal.

Noe was a rare coin dealer who allegedly mismanaged a
$50 million state investment in rare coins. Noe's
attorney has said $13 million was missing from the
investment made for Ohio's Bureau of Worker's
Compensation, a $15 billion fund that makes payments
to disabled workers.

Gov. Taft's father and grandfather both served in the
U.S. Senate and his great-grandfather, William Howard
Taft, was the 27th U.S. president, as well as chief
justice of the U.S. Supreme Court.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,1280,-5217325,00.html

Lott Accuses Frist of 'Personal Betrayal'

Thursday August 18, 2005 1:46 AM

By DAVID ESPO

AP Special Correspondent

WASHINGTON (AP) - Former Senate Majority Leader Trent
Lott blames his fall from power in 2002 on a
``personal betrayal'' by an ambitious Sen. Bill Frist,
his successor, adding in a new book that President
Bush, Colin Powell and other GOP associates played a
role.

Frist, R-Tenn., ``didn't even have the courtesy to
call and tell me personally that he was going to
run,'' the Mississippi Republican wrote of a
tumultuous period in which he lost his position as
Senate leader after making racially tinged remarks.

``If Frist had not announced exactly when he did, as
the fire was about to burn out, I would still be
majority leader of the Senate today,'' Lott said in
``Herding Cats, A Life in Politics.''

In the book, Lott described an unusual partnership
with President Clinton that worked to the detriment of
1996 GOP presidential nominee Bob Dole; praised former
Senate Democratic leader Tom Daschle of South Dakota
as trustworthy; and recalled that Vice President
Gerald R. Ford personally cautioned him ``not to go so
far out on a limb'' in defending President Nixon
during the Watergate scandal.

A native of Mississippi, Lott recalled feeling ``anger
in my heart over the way the federal government had
invaded Ole Miss to accomplish something that could
have been handled peacefully and administratively,''
the admission of the first black student to the
University of Mississippi in 1962.

As a law student at the school, Lott wrote, he
remembered the visiting professors from Yale, brought
in to teach constitutional law. ``Instead of making us
more liberal, they helped create a generation of
thoughtful, issue-oriented conservatives who grew up
to run Mississippi politics.''

Lott, first elected to the House in 1972, moved to the
Senate in 1988.

He became majority leader in 1996, succeeding Dole
when the Kansan quit to campaign full time for the
White House.

In the book, Lott wrote he quickly formed an unusual
alliance with Clinton. Political consultant Dick
Morris was the go-between.

The ``backstairs arrangement'' produced major health
and welfare legislation, ``but I was treading on
dangerous territory,'' Lott wrote.

Dole protested. ``But I thought there was more at
stake than Dole's chances at winning the White
House,'' Lott wrote. ``Dole wasn't providing as much
coattails for other Republicans on the ticket as we
had hoped,'' Lott added.

Republicans lost their thin majority in 2001 when Sen.
Jim Jeffords of Vermont left the GOP to become an
independent.

``I had raised money for Jeffords; in 2000, I had even
campaigned for him in Vermont. Six months later, this
was the way he repaid me,'' Lott wrote.

``He'd always had a habit of bartering his crucial
vote on legislation for his own pet projects,'' Lott
said.

Lott said that Jeffords once demanded $1 billion for a
child health program and also sought provisions to
help Vermont's dairy industry.

Lott's final fall from power was triggered when he
said at Sen. Strom Thurmond's 100th birthday that the
country ``wouldn't have had all these problems over
the years'' if it had elected Thurmond president in
1948.

The remarks directed to the one-time segregationist
were delivered off the cuff, Lott wrote, saying he
often kidded Thurmond, R-S.C., by telling him he would
have made a great president.

The uproar was slow to build. But, Lott wrote, by the
time it was over, former Sen. Don Nickles of Oklahoma
had helped bring him down, and he recalled a tense
conversation with Sen. George Allen of Virginia, who
told him to resign for the good of the party.

```I'm not going to do it,' I yelled back at him. `I'm
not going to do it and I'm very disappointed by your
call,'' Lott wrote.

Bush ``struck at me,'' Lott wrote, when he said that
Lott `has apologized and rightly so.''

Lott added, ``I couldn't argue with the words he
chose. But the tone he employed was devastating ...
booming and nasty.''

Powell, who was secretary of state at the time, called
in reporters to deplore Thurmond's Dixiecrat campaign
of 1948. ``I couldn't understand it. I'd worked with
him enough over the years that he should have known I
wasn't a racist,'' Lott wrote.

^---

On the Net:

Regan Books: www.reganbooks.com

Just another trivia about La Follette. He ranked the most influential
Wisconsinian of the century by a Milwaukee Journal Sentinel survey.
See below for details:

Environmentalist Gaylord A. Nelson dies at age 89; Earth Day Founder,
Wisconsin governor, U.S. Senator
7/3/2005

Gaylord A. Nelson, former Wisconsin governor and U.S. Senator who
founded Earth Day and launched a new wave of environmental activism,
died Sunday, July 3, 2005, at his home in Kensington, Md. He was 89.

Nelson had been in failing health for several months. The cause of
death was cardiovascular failure, his family said. His wife, Carrie
Lee, was by his side when he passed away peacefully about 5:10 a.m. CDT.

Nelson, one of the leading environmentalists of the 20th Century,
joined The Wilderness Society in Washington, D.C. upon leaving the
U.S. Senate in 1981. He served first as the organization's chairman
and later as counselor, and continued to work there on environmental
issues until recent months, when his health declined. He continued to
go to the office at age 88, he said, because, "Our work's not done."

Nelson held elective office for 32 years, including two two-year terms
as Wisconsin governor (1959-1963) and three terms in the U.S. Senate
(1963-1981). He served 10 years in the Wisconsin State Senate before
becoming only the second Democrat to be elected Wisconsin governor in
the 20th Century, and the first to be re-elected.

An early voice for conservation and environmental protection, Nelson
laid out a far-reaching, comprehensive environmental agenda for the
Congress in 1970, and saw much of it became law before he left the
Senate in 1981, at the end of what became known as the Environmental
Decade of the 1970s. In the 10 years after the first Earth Day on
April 22, 1970, 23 major pieces of environmental legislation became law.

He sponsored, co-sponsored or helped pass dozens of environmental laws
aimed at conserving resources and preventing pollution, including the
Wilderness Act and bills preserving the Appalachian Trail and
establishing a national system of hiking trails. Nelson authored
legislation that preserved the Apostle Islands National Lakeshore in
Lake Superior and designated the St. Croix River, which borders
Minnesota and Wisconsin, as a wild and scenic river.

Many of Nelson's ideas were visionary. He fought a long battle to ban
hard detergents containing phosphorous, and was the first member of
Congress to propose a ban on the pesticide DDT, which took years to
accomplish. He once proposed a ban on the internal combustion engine
as an amendment to the Clean Air Act, to get the automobile industry's
attention, and sponsored a constitutional amendment to guarantee
citizens a right to a clean environment.

Nelson established himself as a conservationist, as environmentalists
were then called, as Wisconsin governor, winning passage of a landmark
program to acquire and preserve open space and recreational land. The
$50-million program passed in 1961 was funded by a one-cent per
package tax on cigarettes and became a model for other states. The
program continues today as the Knowles-Nelson Stewardship Program.

Nelson's goal as a U.S. Senator was to elevate environmental issues
and make them a permanent part of the nation's political agenda.

He persuaded President John F. Kennedy to make a national tour to
discuss conservation in 1963, hoping that would ignite a response.
When that brought disappointing results, Nelson continued to press the
issue and in 1969 hit upon the idea of holding a national teach-in on
college campuses on environmental issues, modeled on teach-ins against
the Vietnam War.

On the first Earth Day in 1970, twenty million Americans – 10 per cent
of the population – participated in a wide range of activities
promoting a cleaner Earth.

Earth Day has since grown into an international event, observed in
schools and by organizations on April 22 each year. In 2000, an
estimated 500 million people took part in Earth Day activities in 174
countries. This year, 80% of the schools in the U.S. held Earth Day
activities, organizers said.

Although best known for his environmental work, Nelson also was a key
player in the Senate on consumer protection, civil rights, poverty,
and civil liberties issues. Nelson took on the tire industry on safety
issues, and held 10 years of subcommittee hearings that spotlighted
abuses and problems in the pharmaceutical industry.

He was one of the earliest opponents of the Vietnam War, and drafted
an amendment to the 1964 Gulf of Tonkin resolution to make it clear
the resolution did not authorize a ground war, but Sen. J. William
Fulbright assured Nelson the amendment was not necessary because
President Lyndon B. Johnson had no intention of escalating the ground
war. When escalation came, Nelson cast one of three votes against an
appropriation for the war in 1965, saying, "You need my vote less than
I need my conscience."

The son of a country doctor and a nurse, Nelson was born on June 4,
1916, in Clear Lake, Wisconsin, a village of 700 in northwestern
Wisconsin. His parents were active Progressives who supported Robert
M. (Fighting Bob) La Follette, the populist Wisconsin governor and
Senator who ran as a third party candidate for President in 1924.

He received a bachelor's degree from San Jose State College and a law
degree from the University of Wisconsin in 1942. He served in the Army
Quartermaster Corps during World War II, commanding a company of black
troops in the segregated Army, and was discharged as a first
lieutenant in 1946. When he was elected to the Wisconsin State Senate
in 1948, one of the first bills he introduced was one to desegregate
the state's National Guard.

Nelson met his future wife, Army nurse Carrie Lee Dotson, at a
Pennsylvania Army base but he soon shipped out and did not expect to
see her again. They were reunited on Okinawa, where both were
stationed in 1945. Their story is featured in the best-selling Tom
Brokaw book, "The Greatest Generation."

Nelson's many honors included the Presidential Medal of Freedom, the
nation's highest civilian award, presented in 1995 by President Bill
Clinton. A Wisconsin state park, the Apostle Islands wilderness area,
and the Institute for Environmental Studies at the University of
Wisconsin all are named for him.

When the Audubon Society recognized 100 people who had shaped the
environmental movement in the 20th Century, it said the two political
figures on the list who stood out were Nelson and President Theodore
Roosevelt.

The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel asked a panel of historians and other
experts to name the century's 10 most significant people in Wisconsin.
Nelson ranked fourth, behind Robert M. (Fighting Bob) La Follette,
naturalist, philosopher and author Aldo Leopold, and architect Frank
Lloyd Wright.

Surviving are: Nelson's widow, Carrie Lee; two sons, Gaylord Jr.(and
wife Mary), known as Happy, of Dane, Wis.; and Jeffrey (and wife
Laura), of Kensington, Md.; a daughter, Tia, of Madison, Wis.; and
four grandchildren, Kiva, Jason, Benjamin, and Julia.

Memorial services will be in Madison. Arrangements are pending. Burial
will be in Clear Lake, Wis.

The family asks that memorials in Nelson's name be made to: the
Gaylord Nelson chair at the Gaylord A. Nelson Institute for
Environmental Studies at the University of Wisconsin; the Gaylord
Nelson Studio of WisconsinEye; the Friends of the Apostle Islands; or
the Wilderness Society.


--- In prezveepsenator@yahoogroups.com, Greg Cannon <gregcannon1@y...>
wrote:
> I've also been reading about LaFollette. Here's an
> interesting passage about him in Edmund Morris'
> Theodore Rex (page 442). The dialogue described is
> from 1906, when LaFollette was in his first term as
> Senator.
>
>    One of the weakest men in the Republican Party,
> influentially speaking, visited Roosevelt late at
> night to urge him to demand rates that were reasonable
> as well as nondiscriminatory. Robert LaFollette had
> been studying railroad finance for thirty years, and
> thought that the President might listen to him on the
> subject.
>    "But you can't get any such bill as that through
> Congress."
>    "That is not the first consideration, Mr.
> President."
>    A fault line instantly ran between the idealist and
> the practical politician. LaFollette did not see - or,
> seeing, did not understand that it was already
> unbridgeable, and must one day become a chasm.
>    "But I want to get something through," Roosevelt
> said.
>
> --- THOMAS JOHNSON <AVRCRDNG@F...> wrote:
>
> > While  reading about the Harding administration and
> > the Teapot Dome
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teapot_Dome   scandal,
> > I
> > became re-acquainted with Fightin' Bob LaFollette
> >
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_M._La_Follette%2C_Sr.,
> >   who's primary association for me was as a thorn in
> > Wilson's side. Although Harding was very popular and
> > the scandal had lost the public's interest,
> > Republican
> > LaFollette kept investigating through a Senate
> > committee, with Democrat Thomas Walsh as point man.
> > Eventually the lies did not hold up, resulting in
> > imprisonment, suicides, and a disgraced
> > administration.

This is just one of the many reasons that explain his 19% approval
rating. Rather sad to see the way the "Taft dynasty" died on Bob
Taft's watch (in infamy).

His great-grandfather William Howard Taft, once stuck in the White
House bathtub, is probably rolling in his grave?

Ram


--- In prezveepsenator@yahoogroups.com, Greg Cannon <gregcannon1@y...>
wrote:
>
http://today.reuters.com/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=politicsNews&storyID=2005-08\
-17T220842Z_01_HO779725_RTRIDST_0_POLITICS-CRIME-OHIO-GOVERNOR-DC.XML
>
> Ohio gov. charged with criminal misdemeanors
> Wed Aug 17, 2005 6:09 PM ET
>
> COLUMBUS, Ohio (Reuters) - Prosecutors in Ohio charged
> Gov. Bob Taft on Wednesday with four criminal
> misdemeanor counts alleging violations of state ethics
> laws for not reporting golf games and other outings
> paid for by others.
>
> The charges marked the first time an Ohio governor has
> been charged with a crime while in office. A Taft
> spokesman said the governor would not resign and would
> have a statement on Thursday.
>
> The charges against the Republican governor also
> marked another step in a still-unfolding scandal
> dubbed "Coingate" that involves $13 million in missing
> state funds and a top Ohio Republican fund-raiser.
>
> Stephen McIntosh, chief prosecutor for the Columbus
> city attorney, said most of the outings involved golf
> but also included meals and tickets to see the
> Columbus Blue Jackets hockey team.
>
> The undeclared amounts totaled a little less than
> $6,000, McIntosh said. The governor subsequently
> notified state ethics commission officials about the
> outings that had been omitted in previous filings of
> yearly disclosure forms. McIntosh said the governor is
> required to report gifts or benefits of $75 or more.
>
> Prosecutors were asking that Taft appear in court on
> Thursday morning, though if he chooses to enter a not
> guilty plea only his lawyer would have to be present,
> he said.
>
> If found guilty, he faces fines of $1,000 and six
> months in jail on each count, though jail time was
> considered unlikely.
>
> McIntosh said the probe of Taft grew out of an
> investigation into fund-raiser Tom Noe and the state's
> Bureau of Workers Compensation.
>
> Last month, Taft's former chief of staff was found
> guilty of violating ethics laws by not disclosing
> gifts from Noe, who is at the heart of the Coingate
> scandal.
>
> Noe was a rare coin dealer who allegedly mismanaged a
> $50 million state investment in rare coins. Noe's
> attorney has said $13 million was missing from the
> investment made for Ohio's Bureau of Worker's
> Compensation, a $15 billion fund that makes payments
> to disabled workers.
>
> Gov. Taft's father and grandfather both served in the
> U.S. Senate and his great-grandfather, William Howard
> Taft, was the 27th U.S. president, as well as chief
> justice of the U.S. Supreme Court.

Obesity aside, he still outlived his 3 opponents from
1912. Secretary of State (and chief vote rigger)
Kenneth Blackwell has his eye on Bob's job.. Might see
Paul Hackett run for  Secretary of State.

--- Ram Lau <ramlau@...> wrote:


---------------------------------
This is just one of the many reasons that explain his
19% approval
rating. Rather sad to see the way the "Taft dynasty"
died on Bob
Taft's watch (in infamy).

His great-grandfather William Howard Taft, once stuck
in the White
House bathtub, is probably rolling in his grave?

Ram


--- In prezveepsenator@yahoogroups.com, Greg Cannon
<gregcannon1@y...>
wrote:
>
http://today.reuters.com/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=politicsNews&storyID=2005-08\
-17T220842Z_01_HO779725_RTRIDST_0_POLITICS-CRIME-OHIO-GOVERNOR-DC.XML
>
> Ohio gov. charged with criminal misdemeanors
> Wed Aug 17, 2005 6:09 PM ET
>
> COLUMBUS, Ohio (Reuters) - Prosecutors in Ohio
charged
> Gov. Bob Taft on Wednesday with four criminal
> misdemeanor counts alleging violations of state
ethics
> laws for not reporting golf games and other outings
> paid for by others.
>
> The charges marked the first time an Ohio governor
has
> been charged with a crime while in office. A Taft
> spokesman said the governor would not resign and
would
> have a statement on Thursday.
>
> The charges against the Republican governor also
> marked another step in a still-unfolding scandal
> dubbed "Coingate" that involves $13 million in
missing
> state funds and a top Ohio Republican fund-raiser.
>
> Stephen McIntosh, chief prosecutor for the Columbus
> city attorney, said most of the outings involved
golf
> but also included meals and tickets to see the
> Columbus Blue Jackets hockey team.
>
> The undeclared amounts totaled a little less than
> $6,000, McIntosh said. The governor subsequently
> notified state ethics commission officials about the
> outings that had been omitted in previous filings of
> yearly disclosure forms. McIntosh said the governor
is
> required to report gifts or benefits of $75 or more.
>
> Prosecutors were asking that Taft appear in court on
> Thursday morning, though if he chooses to enter a
not
> guilty plea only his lawyer would have to be
present,
> he said.
>
> If found guilty, he faces fines of $1,000 and six
> months in jail on each count, though jail time was
> considered unlikely.
>
> McIntosh said the probe of Taft grew out of an
> investigation into fund-raiser Tom Noe and the
state's
> Bureau of Workers Compensation.
>
> Last month, Taft's former chief of staff was found
> guilty of violating ethics laws by not disclosing
> gifts from Noe, who is at the heart of the Coingate
> scandal.
>
> Noe was a rare coin dealer who allegedly mismanaged
a
> $50 million state investment in rare coins. Noe's
> attorney has said $13 million was missing from the
> investment made for Ohio's Bureau of Worker's
> Compensation, a $15 billion fund that makes payments
> to disabled workers.
>
> Gov. Taft's father and grandfather both served in
the
> U.S. Senate and his great-grandfather, William
Howard
> Taft, was the 27th U.S. president, as well as chief
> justice of the U.S. Supreme Court.




---------------------------------
   YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS


     Visit your group "prezveepsenator" on the web.

     To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
  prezveepsenator-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

     Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo!
Terms of Service.


---------------------------------

Never a fan of Reagan. An Economics major, I always begin my judgement
on Reagan with his tripling the national debt during his 8 consecutive
deficit years. And the Cold War and the military spending were not the
real reason for the deficit spending.

The future generations will look at Reagan quite differently, and will
most likely remember the baby boom generation with contempt and
disrespect.

Ram


--- In prezveepsenator@yahoogroups.com, THOMAS JOHNSON <AVRCRDNG@F...>
wrote:
> While  reading about the Harding administration and
> the Teapot Dome
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teapot_Dome   scandal, I
> became re-acquainted with Fightin' Bob LaFollette
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_M._La_Follette%2C_Sr.,
>   who's primary association for me was as a thorn in
> Wilson's side. Although Harding was very popular and
> the scandal had lost the public's interest, Republican
> LaFollette kept investigating through a Senate
> committee, with Democrat Thomas Walsh as point man.
> Eventually the lies did not hold up, resulting in
> imprisonment, suicides, and a disgraced
> administration.
> Fast forward 60 years to the Reagan administration and
> the Iran-Contra scandal
> ://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran-Contra_Affair   This
> administration illegally traded arms for hostages,
> with disastrous results reverberating even today.
> Special prosecutor Walsh (ironically) granted immunity
> to some key figures and everybody walked. Far from re
> penitent, House Republicans impeached Bill Clinton,
> according to Representative Dana Rohrabacher R-Cal,
> primarily as payback for to the Democrats for pursuing
> Iran-Contra in the first place.
> In my opinion, Reagan did far more damage to our long
> term interests than Harding, yet Reagan is ranked the
> 11th best president  in Cspan's Survey of Presidential
> Leadership Survey
> http://www.americanpresidents.org/survey/historians/,
> comprised of prominent presidential historians, and
> Harding is ranked 40th of 41.
> How different things might have been if Bob LaFollette
> had towed the party line or if Lawrence Walsh had not.
>
> Tom Johnson
> --- Ram Lau <ramlau@y...> wrote:
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Greg,
>
> Rand has plenty of fans. They've even set up the Ayn
> Rand Institute in
> her name a decade ago:
>
> http://www.aynrand.org/
>
> She's the Milton Friedman of her era:
>
> "Ayn Rand (1905-1982) was an ardent advocate of
> reason, rational
> self-interest, individual rights and free-market
> capitalism.
>
> ARI seeks to promote these principles, spearheading a
> "cultural
> renaissance" that will reverse the anti-reason,
> anti-individualism,
> anti-freedom, anti-capitalist trends in today's
> culture. The major
> battleground in this fight for reason and capitalism
> is the
> educational institutions—high schools, and above all,
> the
> universities, where students learn the ideas that
> shape their lives.
>
> Ayn Rand's philosophy—known as Objectivism—holds that
> historical
> trends are the inescapable product of philosophy. To
> reverse the
> current political and economic trends in America and
> throughout the
> world requires a reversal of our society's fundamental
> philosophy."
>
> Ram
>
>
> --- In prezveepsenator@yahoogroups.com, Greg Cannon
> <gregcannon1@y...>
> wrote:
> > I have vague knowledge of Rand's writings and
> > philosophy. I think they both believed in what they
> > thought of as libertarianism, but had very different
> > views on what exactly that was. Goldman's allies
> were
> > nearly always on the left. She had many friends who
> > were socialist and communist, though she'd always
> > disagree with them on many things. I think the main
> > thing they agreed on was that private property
> should
> > be done away with, and that's one thing I'm sure
> Rand
> > would disagree with them on. Goldman also joined
> them
> > on more down-to-earth causes, like birth control.
> She
> > delivered lectures on birth control, and apparently
> > condoms were distributed at her lectures though
> birth
> > control devices like that weren't legal at the time.
> >
> > I don't know much about Rand's personal life. Was
> she
> > as passionate about her beliefs as Goldman was? What
> > was she like? For that matter, when did she live?
> >
> > --- Ram Lau <ramlau@y...> wrote:
> >
> > > Your mention of Emma Goldman reminds me Ayn Rand,
> > > surely a very
> > > different personality. (Ann Coulter of her
> > > generation?) I sometimes
> > > wonder if the Red Scare had anything to do with
> the
> > > imprisonment.
> > >
> > > Ram
> > >
> > >
> > > --- In prezveepsenator@yahoogroups.com, Greg
> Cannon
> > > <gregcannon1@y...>
> > > wrote:
> > > > I don't know the details of Debs' prosecution,
> but
> > > I
> > > > recall reading that Coolidge eventually pardoned
> > > him.
> > > > And Debs did still get about a million votes in
> > > 1920,
> > > > though he was still in jail.
> > > >
> > > > The best (and really only) book I've read on the
> > > use
> > > > of the Espionage Act was the second volume of
> Emma
> > > > Goldman's autobiography. As an immigrant, she
> was
> > > not
> > > > only jailed but also deported to the Soviet
> Union
> > > > (which she'd left in the 1880s) and never
> allowed
> > > to
> > > > return to America, all because she'd made
> speeches
> > > > against the war and against the draft. Thousands
> > > were
> > > > deported at the same time as her. I recall that
> > > her
> > > > anger was more directed at Wilson's attorney
> > > general
> > > > than at Wilson himself.
> > > >
> > > > --- THOMAS JOHNSON <AVRCRDNG@F...> wrote:
> > > > > I have read that Wilson was prone to use
> > > > > the threat of prosecution of  sedition as a
> > > > > political
> > > > > tool and was not above using propaganda. I'm
> > > curious
> > > > > whether that it is   reasonable to assume that
> > > Deb's
> > > > > incarceration under the Espionage Act was an
> > > attempt
> > > > > to lessen his impact on the 1920 race.
> > > > > I found the image of a weeping Taft being the
> > > last
> > > > > to
> > > > > leave TR's grave site pretty touching, and the
> > > fact
> > > > > that TR delivered a 50 minute speech,
> > > immediately
> > > > > after taking a bullet in the chest,
> astounding.
> > > > >
> > > > > Tom Johnson
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --- Ram Lau <ramlau@y...> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > ---------------------------------
> > > > > Because of his deep sense of fairness and
> > > equality
> > > > > that the original
> > > > > Republican Party embraced, Taft made a superb
> > > > > Supreme
> > > > > Court Chief
> > > > > Justice. I find it impossible to picture what
> > > kind
> > > > > of
> > > > > Justice Bush or
> > > > > Cheney would be, but I pray to God (and I only
> > > > > bother
> > > > > God when
> > > > > necessary) that a Justice Bush/Cheney will
> never
> > > > > happen to mankind.
> > > > >
> > > > > The 1912 election was a critical election. The
> > > > > Democratic Party for
> > > > > the first time experienced the progressive
> > > elements
> > > > > that Woodrow
> > > > > Wilson and William Jennings Bryan embraced,
> > > while
> > > > > the
> > > > > Republican Party
> > > > > began to turn from a center-left party to
> > > something
> > > > > totally different
> > > > > half a century later. Here is the transcript
> of
> > > the
> > > > > BookTV interview
> > > > > with the author of the book "1912: Wilson,
> > > > > Roosevelt,
> > > > > Taft, and Debs -
> > > > > The Election That Changed the Country," a very
> > > > > readable book:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/prezveepsenator/message/192
> > > > >
> > > > > Ram
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --- In prezveepsenator@yahoogroups.com, THOMAS
> > > > > JOHNSON
> > > > > <AVRCRDNG@F...>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > Greg and Ram and all, thanks for the
> responses
> > > and
> > > > > > welcoming me into the group. I have
> > > entertained
> > > > > the
> > > > > > notion that perhaps the Taft presidency was
> > > the
> > > > > most
> > > > > > analogous to our current inhabitant. He was
> > > born
> > > > > into
> > > > > > political privilege, divisive, pious,
> > > > > > anti-environment, and a pawn of the party
> > > > > machinery
> > > > > > (TR claimed they stole the 1912 Republican
> > > > > > nomination). I also  would have included a
> > > puppet
> > > > > of
> > > > > > big business, but after doing a little
> reading
> > > > > > tonight, he apparently  did some
> > > trust-busting. He
> > > > > > seems to have had a pretty good
> > > post-presidency,
> > > > > > including serving on the US Supreme Court. I
> > > also
> > > > > find
> > > > > > it heartening that he and TR, who had been
> > > close
> > > > > > friends( Taft was TR's hand-picked
> successor),
> > > and
> > > > >
> > > > > > were able to have an amicable lunch together
> > > > > before
> > > > > > the latter's death , significant in  that in
>
> > > the
> > > > > 1912
> > > > > > primaries terms such as 'fathead' and
> > > 'congenital
> > > > > > liar' were thrown at each other.
> > > > > >  I caught a bit of the Carl Sferrazza
> Anthony
> > > > > Cspan
> > > > > > interview on the subject of Nellie Taft
> that
> > > Ram
> > > > > > alluded to and  came away with feeling that
> > > she
> > > > > was
> > > > > > pretty cool..thanks Ram for the link to see
> > > the
> > > > > whole
> > > > > > segment and for the great Coolidge
> interview,
> > > the
> > > > > Debs
> > > > > > profile and for answering my question. I'm
> > > > > learning
> > > > > a
> > > > > > lot form you guys.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Tom Johnson
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --- Greg Cannon <gregcannon1@y...> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ---------------------------------
> > > > > > I can't answer your question, Tom, though
> I'd
> > > also
> > > > > > like to know the answer. Do you or anyone
> here
> > > > > have
> > > > > > suggestions on books or websites to do with
> > > the
> > > > > Taft
> > > > > > administration? The Roosevelt biography I'm
> > > > > reading
> > > > > > has been mentioning Taft a lot, how Teddy
> > > began
> > > > > > sending him on important missions and taking
> > > Taft
> > > > > into
> > > > > > his confidence, at least as early as 1905
> > > though
> > > > > > probably earlier.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Roosevelt's occasional anti-trust
> prosecutions
> > > of
> > > > > > monopolies raised quite a storm in his first
> > > term,
> > > > > but
> > >
> > === message truncated ===
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
>   YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
>
>
>     Visit your group "prezveepsenator" on the web.
>
>     To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>  prezveepsenator-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
>     Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo!
> Terms of Service.
>
>
> ---------------------------------

As we all know, Catherine Harris is running for Senate as well. Maybe
the climax top for the neo-CONs? If 1964 for the conservatives was the
2004 for the liberals, I'd like to find out what happened in 1966.

Ram


--- In prezveepsenator@yahoogroups.com, THOMAS JOHNSON <AVRCRDNG@F...>
wrote:
> Obesity aside, he still outlived his 3 opponents from
> 1912. Secretary of State (and chief vote rigger)
> Kenneth Blackwell has his eye on Bob's job.. Might see
> Paul Hackett run for  Secretary of State.
>
> --- Ram Lau <ramlau@y...> wrote:
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> This is just one of the many reasons that explain his
> 19% approval
> rating. Rather sad to see the way the "Taft dynasty"
> died on Bob
> Taft's watch (in infamy).
>
> His great-grandfather William Howard Taft, once stuck
> in the White
> House bathtub, is probably rolling in his grave?
>
> Ram
>
>
> --- In prezveepsenator@yahoogroups.com, Greg Cannon
> <gregcannon1@y...>
> wrote:
> >
>
http://today.reuters.com/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=politicsNews&storyID=2005-08\
-17T220842Z_01_HO779725_RTRIDST_0_POLITICS-CRIME-OHIO-GOVERNOR-DC.XML
> >
> > Ohio gov. charged with criminal misdemeanors
> > Wed Aug 17, 2005 6:09 PM ET
> >
> > COLUMBUS, Ohio (Reuters) - Prosecutors in Ohio
> charged
> > Gov. Bob Taft on Wednesday with four criminal
> > misdemeanor counts alleging violations of state
> ethics
> > laws for not reporting golf games and other outings
> > paid for by others.
> >
> > The charges marked the first time an Ohio governor
> has
> > been charged with a crime while in office. A Taft
> > spokesman said the governor would not resign and
> would
> > have a statement on Thursday.
> >
> > The charges against the Republican governor also
> > marked another step in a still-unfolding scandal
> > dubbed "Coingate" that involves $13 million in
> missing
> > state funds and a top Ohio Republican fund-raiser.
> >
> > Stephen McIntosh, chief prosecutor for the Columbus
> > city attorney, said most of the outings involved
> golf
> > but also included meals and tickets to see the
> > Columbus Blue Jackets hockey team.
> >
> > The undeclared amounts totaled a little less than
> > $6,000, McIntosh said. The governor subsequently
> > notified state ethics commission officials about the
> > outings that had been omitted in previous filings of
> > yearly disclosure forms. McIntosh said the governor
> is
> > required to report gifts or benefits of $75 or more.
> >
> > Prosecutors were asking that Taft appear in court on
> > Thursday morning, though if he chooses to enter a
> not
> > guilty plea only his lawyer would have to be
> present,
> > he said.
> >
> > If found guilty, he faces fines of $1,000 and six
> > months in jail on each count, though jail time was
> > considered unlikely.
> >
> > McIntosh said the probe of Taft grew out of an
> > investigation into fund-raiser Tom Noe and the
> state's
> > Bureau of Workers Compensation.
> >
> > Last month, Taft's former chief of staff was found
> > guilty of violating ethics laws by not disclosing
> > gifts from Noe, who is at the heart of the Coingate
> > scandal.
> >
> > Noe was a rare coin dealer who allegedly mismanaged
> a
> > $50 million state investment in rare coins. Noe's
> > attorney has said $13 million was missing from the
> > investment made for Ohio's Bureau of Worker's
> > Compensation, a $15 billion fund that makes payments
> > to disabled workers.
> >
> > Gov. Taft's father and grandfather both served in
> the
> > U.S. Senate and his great-grandfather, William
> Howard
> > Taft, was the 27th U.S. president, as well as chief
> > justice of the U.S. Supreme Court.
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
>   YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
>
>
>     Visit your group "prezveepsenator" on the web.
>
>     To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>  prezveepsenator-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
>     Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo!
> Terms of Service.
>
>
> ---------------------------------

I saw an article yesterday that Joe Scarborough,
former congressman and current NBC pundit, said he's
thinking of running in the GOP primary against Harris.
The article suggested that the White House wants to
find a candidate less polarizing than Harris, and
Scarborough's got plenty of name recognition.

--- Ram Lau <ramlau@...> wrote:

> As we all know, Catherine Harris is running for
> Senate as well. Maybe
> the climax top for the neo-CONs? If 1964 for the
> conservatives was the
> 2004 for the liberals, I'd like to find out what
> happened in 1966.
>
> Ram
>
>
> --- In prezveepsenator@yahoogroups.com, THOMAS
> JOHNSON <AVRCRDNG@F...>
> wrote:
> > Obesity aside, he still outlived his 3 opponents
> from
> > 1912. Secretary of State (and chief vote rigger)
> > Kenneth Blackwell has his eye on Bob's job.. Might
> see
> > Paul Hackett run for  Secretary of State.
> >
> > --- Ram Lau <ramlau@y...> wrote:
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------
> > This is just one of the many reasons that explain
> his
> > 19% approval
> > rating. Rather sad to see the way the "Taft
> dynasty"
> > died on Bob
> > Taft's watch (in infamy).
> >
> > His great-grandfather William Howard Taft, once
> stuck
> > in the White
> > House bathtub, is probably rolling in his grave?
> >
> > Ram
> >
> >
> > --- In prezveepsenator@yahoogroups.com, Greg
> Cannon
> > <gregcannon1@y...>
> > wrote:
> > >
> >
>
http://today.reuters.com/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=politicsNews&storyID=2005-08\
-17T220842Z_01_HO779725_RTRIDST_0_POLITICS-CRIME-OHIO-GOVERNOR-DC.XML
> > >
> > > Ohio gov. charged with criminal misdemeanors
> > > Wed Aug 17, 2005 6:09 PM ET
> > >
> > > COLUMBUS, Ohio (Reuters) - Prosecutors in Ohio
> > charged
> > > Gov. Bob Taft on Wednesday with four criminal
> > > misdemeanor counts alleging violations of state
> > ethics
> > > laws for not reporting golf games and other
> outings
> > > paid for by others.
> > >
> > > The charges marked the first time an Ohio
> governor
> > has
> > > been charged with a crime while in office. A
> Taft
> > > spokesman said the governor would not resign and
> > would
> > > have a statement on Thursday.
> > >
> > > The charges against the Republican governor also
> > > marked another step in a still-unfolding scandal
> > > dubbed "Coingate" that involves $13 million in
> > missing
> > > state funds and a top Ohio Republican
> fund-raiser.
> > >
> > > Stephen McIntosh, chief prosecutor for the
> Columbus
> > > city attorney, said most of the outings involved
> > golf
> > > but also included meals and tickets to see the
> > > Columbus Blue Jackets hockey team.
> > >
> > > The undeclared amounts totaled a little less
> than
> > > $6,000, McIntosh said. The governor subsequently
> > > notified state ethics commission officials about
> the
> > > outings that had been omitted in previous
> filings of
> > > yearly disclosure forms. McIntosh said the
> governor
> > is
> > > required to report gifts or benefits of $75 or
> more.
> > >
> > > Prosecutors were asking that Taft appear in
> court on
> > > Thursday morning, though if he chooses to enter
> a
> > not
> > > guilty plea only his lawyer would have to be
> > present,
> > > he said.
> > >
> > > If found guilty, he faces fines of $1,000 and
> six
> > > months in jail on each count, though jail time
> was
> > > considered unlikely.
> > >
> > > McIntosh said the probe of Taft grew out of an
> > > investigation into fund-raiser Tom Noe and the
> > state's
> > > Bureau of Workers Compensation.
> > >
> > > Last month, Taft's former chief of staff was
> found
> > > guilty of violating ethics laws by not
> disclosing
> > > gifts from Noe, who is at the heart of the
> Coingate
> > > scandal.
> > >
> > > Noe was a rare coin dealer who allegedly
> mismanaged
> > a
> > > $50 million state investment in rare coins.
> Noe's
> > > attorney has said $13 million was missing from
> the
> > > investment made for Ohio's Bureau of Worker's
> > > Compensation, a $15 billion fund that makes
> payments
> > > to disabled workers.
> > >
> > > Gov. Taft's father and grandfather both served
> in
> > the
> > > U.S. Senate and his great-grandfather, William
> > Howard
> > > Taft, was the 27th U.S. president, as well as
> chief
> > > justice of the U.S. Supreme Court.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------
> >   YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
> >
> >
> >     Visit your group "prezveepsenator" on the web.
> >
> >     To unsubscribe from this group, send an email
> to:
> >  prezveepsenator-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> >
> >     Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the
> Yahoo!
> > Terms of Service.
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------
>
>
>

I'd like to find out what happened in 1966.

Looks like the Dems took a  big bath in 1966, losing
47 seats in the house and 4 in the senate. Figuring
for population growth, it's probably  roughly
equivalent to 1994. Check 1998 out, however.

B. Presidential Party Surge/Midterm Dropoff •  But,
the more they win in presidential election years, the
more they are likely to lose during the midterm
election. Midterm Fortunes of Presidential Parties,
House and Senate, 1934-1998 Year President Seats
Gained or Lost House Senate 1934 Roosevelt (D) +9 +10
1938 Roosevelt (D) -71 -6 1942 Roosevelt (D) -55 -9
1946 Roosevelt-Truman (D) -45 -12 1950 Truman (D) -29
-6 1954 Eisenhower (R) -18 -1 1958 Eisenhower (R) -48
-13 1962 Kennedy (D) -4 +3 1966 Johnson (D) -47 -4
1970 Nixon (R) -12 +2 1974 Nixon-Ford (R) -48 -5 1978
Carter (D) -15 -3 1982 Reagan (R) -26 +1 1986 Reagan
(R) -5 -8 1990 Bush (R) -8 -1 1994 Clinton (D) -52 -8
1998 Clinton (D) +5 0

I still think there is something to be learned from
the progressive strides of the early 20 century. What
caused suffrage, child labor legislation, 40 hr work
weeks, etc.  to come about in a relatively short
period of time? Maybe the Bolshevik revolution shook
up the big money interests. Maybe it became obvious
that it was smart politics.
I don't think anybody ever accused Warren Harding of
being a particularly enlightened thinker but he was
the first president that women were allowed to vote
for and he supported suffrage and won big.
I also heard that Bush asked Catherine Harris not to
run. She gave him what he wanted and he dumped her..
could that be the neo-cons version of slam,bam,thank
you, ma'am?

Tom



--- Ram Lau <ramlau@...> wrote:


---------------------------------
As we all know, Catherine Harris is running for Senate
as well. Maybe
the climax top for the neo-CONs? If 1964 for the
conservatives was the
2004 for the liberals, I'd like to find out what
happened in 1966.

Ram


--- In prezveepsenator@yahoogroups.com, THOMAS JOHNSON
<AVRCRDNG@F...>
wrote:
> Obesity aside, he still outlived his 3 opponents
from
> 1912. Secretary of State (and chief vote rigger)
> Kenneth Blackwell has his eye on Bob's job.. Might
see
> Paul Hackett run for  Secretary of State.
>
> --- Ram Lau <ramlau@y...> wrote:
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> This is just one of the many reasons that explain
his
> 19% approval
> rating. Rather sad to see the way the "Taft dynasty"
> died on Bob
> Taft's watch (in infamy).
>
> His great-grandfather William Howard Taft, once
stuck
> in the White
> House bathtub, is probably rolling in his grave?
>
> Ram
>
>
> --- In prezveepsenator@yahoogroups.com, Greg Cannon
> <gregcannon1@y...>
> wrote:
> >
>
http://today.reuters.com/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=politicsNews&storyID=2005-08\
-17T220842Z_01_HO779725_RTRIDST_0_POLITICS-CRIME-OHIO-GOVERNOR-DC.XML
> >
> > Ohio gov. charged with criminal misdemeanors
> > Wed Aug 17, 2005 6:09 PM ET
> >
> > COLUMBUS, Ohio (Reuters) - Prosecutors in Ohio
> charged
> > Gov. Bob Taft on Wednesday with four criminal
> > misdemeanor counts alleging violations of state
> ethics
> > laws for not reporting golf games and other
outings
> > paid for by others.
> >
> > The charges marked the first time an Ohio governor
> has
> > been charged with a crime while in office. A Taft
> > spokesman said the governor would not resign and
> would
> > have a statement on Thursday.
> >
> > The charges against the Republican governor also
> > marked another step in a still-unfolding scandal
> > dubbed "Coingate" that involves $13 million in
> missing
> > state funds and a top Ohio Republican fund-raiser.
> >
> > Stephen McIntosh, chief prosecutor for the
Columbus
> > city attorney, said most of the outings involved
> golf
> > but also included meals and tickets to see the
> > Columbus Blue Jackets hockey team.
> >
> > The undeclared amounts totaled a little less than
> > $6,000, McIntosh said. The governor subsequently
> > notified state ethics commission officials about
the
> > outings that had been omitted in previous filings
of
> > yearly disclosure forms. McIntosh said the
governor
> is
> > required to report gifts or benefits of $75 or
more.
> >
> > Prosecutors were asking that Taft appear in court
on
> > Thursday morning, though if he chooses to enter a
> not
> > guilty plea only his lawyer would have to be
> present,
> > he said.
> >
> > If found guilty, he faces fines of $1,000 and six
> > months in jail on each count, though jail time was
> > considered unlikely.
> >
> > McIntosh said the probe of Taft grew out of an
> > investigation into fund-raiser Tom Noe and the
> state's
> > Bureau of Workers Compensation.
> >
> > Last month, Taft's former chief of staff was found
> > guilty of violating ethics laws by not disclosing
> > gifts from Noe, who is at the heart of the
Coingate
> > scandal.
> >
> > Noe was a rare coin dealer who allegedly
mismanaged
> a
> > $50 million state investment in rare coins. Noe's
> > attorney has said $13 million was missing from the
> > investment made for Ohio's Bureau of Worker's
> > Compensation, a $15 billion fund that makes
payments
> > to disabled workers.
> >
> > Gov. Taft's father and grandfather both served in
> the
> > U.S. Senate and his great-grandfather, William
> Howard
> > Taft, was the 27th U.S. president, as well as
chief
> > justice of the U.S. Supreme Court.
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
>   YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
>
>
>     Visit your group "prezveepsenator" on the web.
>
>     To unsubscribe from this group, send an email
to:
>  prezveepsenator-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
>     Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the
Yahoo!
> Terms of Service.
>
>
> ---------------------------------




---------------------------------
   YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS


     Visit your group "prezveepsenator" on the web.

     To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
  prezveepsenator-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

     Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo!
Terms of Service.


---------------------------------

Why Reagan remains so popular with historians and pols
totally escapes me. When we lost the 247 marines in
Lebanon, he wagged the dog and invaded Grenada to
replace the tragedy as the main story . Not much was
passed in the way of legislation on his watch but what
did get through usually benefited the rich at the
expense of the rest of us. He supported Pinochet,
Suharto, the Contras and apartheid- era South Africa,
going so for as condemning Nelson Mandela as a
"communist terrorist." Nobel Peace Prize winner
Desmond Tutu called him,"immoral, evil, and totally
un-Christian."  And then there was the incident where
he called Princess Diana   "Princess David."




--- Ram Lau <ramlau@...> wrote:


---------------------------------
Never a fan of Reagan. An Economics major, I always
begin my judgement
on Reagan with his tripling the national debt during
his 8 consecutive
deficit years. And the Cold War and the military
spending were not the
real reason for the deficit spending.

The future generations will look at Reagan quite
differently, and will
most likely remember the baby boom generation with
contempt and
disrespect.

Ram


--- In prezveepsenator@yahoogroups.com, THOMAS JOHNSON
<AVRCRDNG@F...>
wrote:
> While  reading about the Harding administration and
> the Teapot Dome
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teapot_Dome   scandal,
I
> became re-acquainted with Fightin' Bob LaFollette
>
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_M._La_Follette%2C_Sr.,
>   who's primary association for me was as a thorn in
> Wilson's side. Although Harding was very popular and
> the scandal had lost the public's interest,
Republican
> LaFollette kept investigating through a Senate
> committee, with Democrat Thomas Walsh as point man.
> Eventually the lies did not hold up, resulting in
> imprisonment, suicides, and a disgraced
> administration.
> Fast forward 60 years to the Reagan administration
and
> the Iran-Contra scandal
> ://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran-Contra_Affair   This
> administration illegally traded arms for hostages,
> with disastrous results reverberating even today.
> Special prosecutor Walsh (ironically) granted
immunity
> to some key figures and everybody walked. Far from
re
> penitent, House Republicans impeached Bill Clinton,
> according to Representative Dana Rohrabacher R-Cal,
> primarily as payback for to the Democrats for
pursuing
> Iran-Contra in the first place.
> In my opinion, Reagan did far more damage to our
long
> term interests than Harding, yet Reagan is ranked
the
> 11th best president  in Cspan's Survey of
Presidential
> Leadership Survey
>
http://www.americanpresidents.org/survey/historians/,
> comprised of prominent presidential historians, and
> Harding is ranked 40th of 41.
> How different things might have been if Bob
LaFollette
> had towed the party line or if Lawrence Walsh had
not.
>
> Tom Johnson
> --- Ram Lau <ramlau@y...> wrote:
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Greg,
>
> Rand has plenty of fans. They've even set up the Ayn
> Rand Institute in
> her name a decade ago:
>
> http://www.aynrand.org/
>
> She's the Milton Friedman of her era:
>
> "Ayn Rand (1905-1982) was an ardent advocate of
> reason, rational
> self-interest, individual rights and free-market
> capitalism.
>
> ARI seeks to promote these principles, spearheading
a
> "cultural
> renaissance" that will reverse the anti-reason,
> anti-individualism,
> anti-freedom, anti-capitalist trends in today's
> culture. The major
> battleground in this fight for reason and capitalism
> is the
> educational institutions—high schools, and above
all,
> the
> universities, where students learn the ideas that
> shape their lives.
>
> Ayn Rand's philosophy—known as Objectivism—holds
that
> historical
> trends are the inescapable product of philosophy. To
> reverse the
> current political and economic trends in America and
> throughout the
> world requires a reversal of our society's
fundamental
> philosophy."
>
> Ram
>
>
> --- In prezveepsenator@yahoogroups.com, Greg Cannon
> <gregcannon1@y...>
> wrote:
> > I have vague knowledge of Rand's writings and
> > philosophy. I think they both believed in what
they
> > thought of as libertarianism, but had very
different
> > views on what exactly that was. Goldman's allies
> were
> > nearly always on the left. She had many friends
who
> > were socialist and communist, though she'd always
> > disagree with them on many things. I think the
main
> > thing they agreed on was that private property
> should
> > be done away with, and that's one thing I'm sure
> Rand
> > would disagree with them on. Goldman also joined
> them
> > on more down-to-earth causes, like birth control.
> She
> > delivered lectures on birth control, and
apparently
> > condoms were distributed at her lectures though
> birth
> > control devices like that weren't legal at the
time.
> >
> > I don't know much about Rand's personal life. Was
> she
> > as passionate about her beliefs as Goldman was?
What
> > was she like? For that matter, when did she live?
> >
> > --- Ram Lau <ramlau@y...> wrote:
> >
> > > Your mention of Emma Goldman reminds me Ayn
Rand,
> > > surely a very
> > > different personality. (Ann Coulter of her
> > > generation?) I sometimes
> > > wonder if the Red Scare had anything to do with
> the
> > > imprisonment.
> > >
> > > Ram
> > >
> > >
> > > --- In prezveepsenator@yahoogroups.com, Greg
> Cannon
> > > <gregcannon1@y...>
> > > wrote:
> > > > I don't know the details of Debs' prosecution,
> but
> > > I
> > > > recall reading that Coolidge eventually
pardoned
> > > him.
> > > > And Debs did still get about a million votes
in
> > > 1920,
> > > > though he was still in jail.
> > > >
> > > > The best (and really only) book I've read on
the
> > > use
> > > > of the Espionage Act was the second volume of
> Emma
> > > > Goldman's autobiography. As an immigrant, she
> was
> > > not
> > > > only jailed but also deported to the Soviet
> Union
> > > > (which she'd left in the 1880s) and never
> allowed
> > > to
> > > > return to America, all because she'd made
> speeches
> > > > against the war and against the draft.
Thousands
> > > were
> > > > deported at the same time as her. I recall
that
> > > her
> > > > anger was more directed at Wilson's attorney
> > > general
> > > > than at Wilson himself.
> > > >
> > > > --- THOMAS JOHNSON <AVRCRDNG@F...> wrote:
> > > > > I have read that Wilson was prone to use
> > > > > the threat of prosecution of  sedition as a
> > > > > political
> > > > > tool and was not above using propaganda. I'm
> > > curious
> > > > > whether that it is   reasonable to assume
that
> > > Deb's
> > > > > incarceration under the Espionage Act was an
> > > attempt
> > > > > to lessen his impact on the 1920 race.
> > > > > I found the image of a weeping Taft being
the
> > > last
> > > > > to
> > > > > leave TR's grave site pretty touching, and
the
> > > fact
> > > > > that TR delivered a 50 minute speech,
> > > immediately
> > > > > after taking a bullet in the chest,
> astounding.
> > > > >
> > > > > Tom Johnson
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --- Ram Lau <ramlau@y...> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > ---------------------------------
> > > > > Because of his deep sense of fairness and
> > > equality
> > > > > that the original
> > > > > Republican Party embraced, Taft made a
superb
> > > > > Supreme
> > > > > Court Chief
> > > > > Justice. I find it impossible to picture
what
> > > kind
> > > > > of
> > > > > Justice Bush or
> > > > > Cheney would be, but I pray to God (and I
only
> > > > > bother
> > > > > God when
> > > > > necessary) that a Justice Bush/Cheney will
> never
> > > > > happen to mankind.
> > > > >
> > > > > The 1912 election was a critical election.
The
> > > > > Democratic Party for
> > > > > the first time experienced the progressive
> > > elements
> > > > > that Woodrow
> > > > > Wilson and William Jennings Bryan embraced,
> > > while
> > > > > the
> > > > > Republican Party
> > > > > began to turn from a center-left party to
> > > something
> > > > > totally different
> > > > > half a century later. Here is the transcript
> of
> > > the
> > > > > BookTV interview
> > > > > with the author of the book "1912: Wilson,
> > > > > Roosevelt,
> > > > > Taft, and Debs -
> > > > > The Election That Changed the Country," a
very
> > > > > readable book:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/prezveepsenator/message/192
> > > > >
> > > > > Ram
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --- In prezveepsenator@yahoogroups.com,
THOMAS
> > > > > JOHNSON
> > > > > <AVRCRDNG@F...>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > Greg and Ram and all, thanks for the
> responses
> > > and
> > > > > > welcoming me into the group. I have
> > > entertained
> > > > > the
> > > > > > notion that perhaps the Taft presidency
was
> > > the
> > > > > most
> > > > > > analogous to our current inhabitant. He
was
> > > born
> > > > > into
> > > > > > political privilege, divisive, pious,
> > > > > > anti-environment, and a pawn of the party
> > > > > machinery
> > > > > > (TR claimed they stole the 1912 Republican
> > > > > > nomination). I also  would have included a
> > > puppet
> > > > > of
> > > > > > big business, but after doing a little
> reading
> > > > > > tonight, he apparently  did some
> > > trust-busting. He
> > > > > > seems to have had a pretty good
> > > post-presidency,
> > > > > > including serving on the US Supreme Court.
I
> > > also
> > > > > find
> > > > > > it heartening that he and TR, who had been
> > > close
> > > > > > friends( Taft was TR's hand-picked
> successor),
> > > and
> > > > >
> > > > > > were able to have an amicable lunch
together
> > > > > before
> > > > > > the latter's death , significant in  that
in
>
> > > the
> > > > > 1912
> > > > > > primaries terms such as 'fathead' and
> > > 'congenital
> > > > > > liar' were thrown at each other.
> > > > > >  I caught a bit of the Carl Sferrazza
> Anthony
> > > > > Cspan
> > > > > > interview on the subject of Nellie Taft
> that
> > > Ram
> > > > > > alluded to and  came away with feeling
that
> > > she
> > > > > was
> > > > > > pretty cool..thanks Ram for the link to
see
> > > the
> > > > > whole
> > > > > > segment and for the great Coolidge
> interview,
> > > the
> > > > > Debs
> > > > > > profile and for answering my question. I'm
> > > > > learning
> > > > > a
> > > > > > lot form you guys.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Tom Johnson
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --- Greg Cannon <gregcannon1@y...> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ---------------------------------
> > > > > > I can't answer your question, Tom, though
> I'd
> > > also
> > > > > > like to know the answer. Do you or anyone
> here
> > > > > have
> > > > > > suggestions on books or websites to do
with
> > > the
> > > > > Taft
> > > > > > administration? The Roosevelt biography
I'm
> > > > > reading
> > > > > > has been mentioning Taft a lot, how Teddy
> > > began
> > > > > > sending him on important missions and
taking
> > > Taft
> > > > > into
> > > > > > his confidence, at least as early as 1905
> > > though
> > > > > > probably earlier.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Roosevelt's occasional anti-trust
> prosecutions
> > > of
> > > > > > monopolies raised quite a storm in his
first
> > > term,
> > > > > but
> > >
> > === message truncated ===
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
>   YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
>
>
>     Visit your group "prezveepsenator" on the web.
>
>     To unsubscribe from this group, send an email
to:
>  prezveepsenator-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
>     Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the
Yahoo!
> Terms of Service.
>
>
> ---------------------------------




---------------------------------
   YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS


     Visit your group "prezveepsenator" on the web.

     To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
  prezveepsenator-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

     Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo!
Terms of Service.


---------------------------------

Princess David! He probably said that in his second term? His
Alzheimer's problem was getting quite real in his last years.

His Budget Director, David Stockman, actually wrote a book confessing
how much damage the supply-side (a.k.a. voodoo) economics had damage
the economy in the long run. I just wonder where the true
conservatives were and are when it comes to an issue as immoral as
driving the country into bankrupcy for the future generations.

Ram


--- In prezveepsenator@yahoogroups.com, THOMAS JOHNSON <AVRCRDNG@F...>
wrote:
> Why Reagan remains so popular with historians and pols
> totally escapes me. When we lost the 247 marines in
> Lebanon, he wagged the dog and invaded Grenada to
> replace the tragedy as the main story . Not much was
> passed in the way of legislation on his watch but what
> did get through usually benefited the rich at the
> expense of the rest of us. He supported Pinochet,
> Suharto, the Contras and apartheid- era South Africa,
> going so for as condemning Nelson Mandela as a
> "communist terrorist." Nobel Peace Prize winner
> Desmond Tutu called him,"immoral, evil, and totally
> un-Christian."  And then there was the incident where
> he called Princess Diana   "Princess David."
>
>
>
>
> --- Ram Lau <ramlau@y...> wrote:
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Never a fan of Reagan. An Economics major, I always
> begin my judgement
> on Reagan with his tripling the national debt during
> his 8 consecutive
> deficit years. And the Cold War and the military
> spending were not the
> real reason for the deficit spending.
>
> The future generations will look at Reagan quite
> differently, and will
> most likely remember the baby boom generation with
> contempt and
> disrespect.
>
> Ram
>
>
> --- In prezveepsenator@yahoogroups.com, THOMAS JOHNSON
> <AVRCRDNG@F...>
> wrote:
> > While  reading about the Harding administration and
> > the Teapot Dome
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teapot_Dome   scandal,
> I
> > became re-acquainted with Fightin' Bob LaFollette
> >
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_M._La_Follette%2C_Sr.,
> >   who's primary association for me was as a thorn in
> > Wilson's side. Although Harding was very popular and
> > the scandal had lost the public's interest,
> Republican
> > LaFollette kept investigating through a Senate
> > committee, with Democrat Thomas Walsh as point man.
> > Eventually the lies did not hold up, resulting in
> > imprisonment, suicides, and a disgraced
> > administration.
> > Fast forward 60 years to the Reagan administration
> and
> > the Iran-Contra scandal
> > ://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran-Contra_Affair   This
> > administration illegally traded arms for hostages,
> > with disastrous results reverberating even today.
> > Special prosecutor Walsh (ironically) granted
> immunity
> > to some key figures and everybody walked. Far from
> re
> > penitent, House Republicans impeached Bill Clinton,
> > according to Representative Dana Rohrabacher R-Cal,
> > primarily as payback for to the Democrats for
> pursuing
> > Iran-Contra in the first place.
> > In my opinion, Reagan did far more damage to our
> long
> > term interests than Harding, yet Reagan is ranked
> the
> > 11th best president  in Cspan's Survey of
> Presidential
> > Leadership Survey
> >
> http://www.americanpresidents.org/survey/historians/,
> > comprised of prominent presidential historians, and
> > Harding is ranked 40th of 41.
> > How different things might have been if Bob
> LaFollette
> > had towed the party line or if Lawrence Walsh had
> not.
> >
> > Tom Johnson
> > --- Ram Lau <ramlau@y...> wrote:
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------
> > Greg,
> >
> > Rand has plenty of fans. They've even set up the Ayn
> > Rand Institute in
> > her name a decade ago:
> >
> > http://www.aynrand.org/
> >
> > She's the Milton Friedman of her era:
> >
> > "Ayn Rand (1905-1982) was an ardent advocate of
> > reason, rational
> > self-interest, individual rights and free-market
> > capitalism.
> >
> > ARI seeks to promote these principles, spearheading
> a
> > "cultural
> > renaissance" that will reverse the anti-reason,
> > anti-individualism,
> > anti-freedom, anti-capitalist trends in today's
> > culture. The major
> > battleground in this fight for reason and capitalism
> > is the
> > educational institutions�high schools, and above
> all,
> > the
> > universities, where students learn the ideas that
> > shape their lives.
> >
> > Ayn Rand's philosophy�known as Objectivism�holds
> that
> > historical
> > trends are the inescapable product of philosophy. To
> > reverse the
> > current political and economic trends in America and
> > throughout the
> > world requires a reversal of our society's
> fundamental
> > philosophy."
> >
> > Ram
> >
> >
> > --- In prezveepsenator@yahoogroups.com, Greg Cannon
> > <gregcannon1@y...>
> > wrote:
> > > I have vague knowledge of Rand's writings and
> > > philosophy. I think they both believed in what
> they
> > > thought of as libertarianism, but had very
> different
> > > views on what exactly that was. Goldman's allies
> > were
> > > nearly always on the left. She had many friends
> who
> > > were socialist and communist, though she'd always
> > > disagree with them on many things. I think the
> main
> > > thing they agreed on was that private property
> > should
> > > be done away with, and that's one thing I'm sure
> > Rand
> > > would disagree with them on. Goldman also joined
> > them
> > > on more down-to-earth causes, like birth control.
> > She
> > > delivered lectures on birth control, and
> apparently
> > > condoms were distributed at her lectures though
> > birth
> > > control devices like that weren't legal at the
> time.
> > >
> > > I don't know much about Rand's personal life. Was
> > she
> > > as passionate about her beliefs as Goldman was?
> What
> > > was she like? For that matter, when did she live?
> > >
> > > --- Ram Lau <ramlau@y...> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Your mention of Emma Goldman reminds me Ayn
> Rand,
> > > > surely a very
> > > > different personality. (Ann Coulter of her
> > > > generation?) I sometimes
> > > > wonder if the Red Scare had anything to do with
> > the
> > > > imprisonment.
> > > >
> > > > Ram
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --- In prezveepsenator@yahoogroups.com, Greg
> > Cannon
> > > > <gregcannon1@y...>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > I don't know the details of Debs' prosecution,
> > but
> > > > I
> > > > > recall reading that Coolidge eventually
> pardoned
> > > > him.
> > > > > And Debs did still get about a million votes
> in
> > > > 1920,
> > > > > though he was still in jail.
> > > > >
> > > > > The best (and really only) book I've read on
> the
> > > > use
> > > > > of the Espionage Act was the second volume of
> > Emma
> > > > > Goldman's autobiography. As an immigrant, she
> > was
> > > > not
> > > > > only jailed but also deported to the Soviet
> > Union
> > > > > (which she'd left in the 1880s) and never
> > allowed
> > > > to
> > > > > return to America, all because she'd made
> > speeches
> > > > > against the war and against the draft.
> Thousands
> > > > were
> > > > > deported at the same time as her. I recall
> that
> > > > her
> > > > > anger was more directed at Wilson's attorney
> > > > general
> > > > > than at Wilson himself.
> > > > >
> > > > > --- THOMAS JOHNSON <AVRCRDNG@F...> wrote:
> > > > > > I have read that Wilson was prone to use
> > > > > > the threat of prosecution of  sedition as a
> > > > > > political
> > > > > > tool and was not above using propaganda. I'm
> > > > curious
> > > > > > whether that it is   reasonable to assume
> that
> > > > Deb's
> > > > > > incarceration under the Espionage Act was an
> > > > attempt
> > > > > > to lessen his impact on the 1920 race.
> > > > > > I found the image of a weeping Taft being
> the
> > > > last
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > leave TR's grave site pretty touching, and
> the
> > > > fact
> > > > > > that TR delivered a 50 minute speech,
> > > > immediately
> > > > > > after taking a bullet in the chest,
> > astounding.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Tom Johnson
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --- Ram Lau <ramlau@y...> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ---------------------------------
> > > > > > Because of his deep sense of fairness and
> > > > equality
> > > > > > that the original
> > > > > > Republican Party embraced, Taft made a
> superb
> > > > > > Supreme
> > > > > > Court Chief
> > > > > > Justice. I find it impossible to picture
> what
> > > > kind
> > > > > > of
> > > > > > Justice Bush or
> > > > > > Cheney would be, but I pray to God (and I
> only
> > > > > > bother
> > > > > > God when
> > > > > > necessary) that a Justice Bush/Cheney will
> > never
> > > > > > happen to mankind.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The 1912 election was a critical election.
> The
> > > > > > Democratic Party for
> > > > > > the first time experienced the progressive
> > > > elements
> > > > > > that Woodrow
> > > > > > Wilson and William Jennings Bryan embraced,
> > > > while
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > Republican Party
> > > > > > began to turn from a center-left party to
> > > > something
> > > > > > totally different
> > > > > > half a century later. Here is the transcript
> > of
> > > > the
> > > > > > BookTV interview
> > > > > > with the author of the book "1912: Wilson,
> > > > > > Roosevelt,
> > > > > > Taft, and Debs -
> > > > > > The Election That Changed the Country," a
> very
> > > > > > readable book:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/prezveepsenator/message/192
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Ram
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --- In prezveepsenator@yahoogroups.com,
> THOMAS
> > > > > > JOHNSON
> > > > > > <AVRCRDNG@F...>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > Greg and Ram and all, thanks for the
> > responses
> > > > and
> > > > > > > welcoming me into the group. I have
> > > > entertained
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > notion that perhaps the Taft presidency
> was
> > > > the
> > > > > > most
> > > > > > > analogous to our current inhabitant. He
> was
> > > > born
> > > > > > into
> > > > > > > political privilege, divisive, pious,
> > > > > > > anti-environment, and a pawn of the party
> > > > > > machinery
> > > > > > > (TR claimed they stole the 1912 Republican
> > > > > > > nomination). I also  would have included a
> > > > puppet
> > > > > > of
> > > > > > > big business, but after doing a little
> > reading
> > > > > > > tonight, he apparently  did some
> > > > trust-busting. He
> > > > > > > seems to have had a pretty good
> > > > post-presidency,
> > > > > > > including serving on the US Supreme Court.
> I
> > > > also
> > > > > > find
> > > > > > > it heartening that he and TR, who had been
> > > > close
> > > > > > > friends( Taft was TR's hand-picked
> > successor),
> > > > and
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > were able to have an amicable lunch
> together
> > > > > > before
> > > > > > > the latter's death , significant in  that
> in
> >
> > > > the
> > > > > > 1912
> > > > > > > primaries terms such as 'fathead' and
> > > > 'congenital
> > > > > > > liar' were thrown at each other.
> > > > > > >  I caught a bit of the Carl Sferrazza
> > Anthony
> > > > > > Cspan
> > > > > > > interview on the subject of Nellie Taft
> > that
> > > > Ram
> > > > > > > alluded to and  came away with feeling
> that
> > > > she
> > > > > > was
> > > > > > > pretty cool..thanks Ram for the link to
> see
> > > > the
> > > > > > whole
> > > > > > > segment and for the great Coolidge
> > interview,
> > > > the
> > > > > > Debs
> > > > > > > profile and for answering my question. I'm
> > > > > > learning
> > > > > > a
> > > > > > > lot form you guys.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Tom Johnson
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --- Greg Cannon <gregcannon1@y...> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > ---------------------------------
> > > > > > > I can't answer your question, Tom, though
> > I'd
> > > > also
> > > > > > > like to know the answer. Do you or anyone
> > here
> > > > > > have
> > > > > > > suggestions on books or websites to do
> with
> > > > the
> > > > > > Taft
> > > > > > > administration? The Roosevelt biography
> I'm
> > > > > > reading
> > > > > > > has been mentioning Taft a lot, how Teddy
> > > > began
> > > > > > > sending him on important missions and
> taking
> > > > Taft
> > > > > > into
> > > > > > > his confidence, at least as early as 1905
> > > > though
> > > > > > > probably earlier.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Roosevelt's occasional anti-trust
> > prosecutions
> > > > of
> > > > > > > monopolies raised quite a storm in his
> first
> > > > term,
> > > > > > but
> > > >
> > > === message truncated ===
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------
> >   YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
> >
> >
> >     Visit your group "prezveepsenator" on the web.
> >
> >     To unsubscribe from this group, send an email
> to:
> >  prezveepsenator-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> >
> >     Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the
> Yahoo!
> > Terms of Service.
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
>   YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
>
>
>     Visit your group "prezveepsenator" on the web.
>
>     To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>  prezveepsenator-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
>     Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo!
> Terms of Service.
>
>
> ---------------------------------

Maybe he got Diana and Stockman mixed up.
In an effort to see it from a historian's viewpoint, I
did a little reading in hopes of understanding what
the attraction was.. This from the Wikipedia:
Some analysts argue that the eventual collapse of the
Soviet Union was due more to the reawakening of
internal separatist problems under glasnost, an
inherent weakness in communist economic theory, and
the depressed global price of crude oil, on which the
Soviet economy during those years depended heavily.
Furthermore, Reagan's much heralded military buildup
that increased American military spending by 8% per
annum in fact did not appear to have the planned
effect of forcing the Soviets to mirror American
growth: according to CIA estimates, Soviet military
spending levelled off at a growth rate of 1.3% per
annum in 1975 and remained at that level for a decade,
rising slightly to approximately 4.3% in 1985 through
1987 (though spending on offensive strategic weapons
continued to grow at 1.3% during that period), before
returning to 1.3% in 1988. It is also often pointed
out that many actions popularly attributed to Reagan
were actually initiated by his predecessor Jimmy
Carter, such as the increase in military spending and
the decisions to fund anti-communist militant groups
in Nicaragua and Afghanistan.

That didn't help.

Tom


--- Ram Lau <ramlau@...> wrote:


---------------------------------
Princess David! He probably said that in his second
term? His
Alzheimer's problem was getting quite real in his last
years.

His Budget Director, David Stockman, actually wrote a
book confessing
how much damage the supply-side (a.k.a. voodoo)
economics had damage
the economy in the long run. I just wonder where the
true
conservatives were and are when it comes to an issue
as immoral as
driving the country into bankrupcy for the future
generations.

Ram


--- In prezveepsenator@yahoogroups.com, THOMAS JOHNSON
<AVRCRDNG@F...>
wrote:
> Why Reagan remains so popular with historians and
pols
> totally escapes me. When we lost the 247 marines in
> Lebanon, he wagged the dog and invaded Grenada to
> replace the tragedy as the main story . Not much was
> passed in the way of legislation on his watch but
what
> did get through usually benefited the rich at the
> expense of the rest of us. He supported Pinochet,
> Suharto, the Contras and apartheid- era South
Africa,
> going so for as condemning Nelson Mandela as a
> "communist terrorist." Nobel Peace Prize winner
> Desmond Tutu called him,"immoral, evil, and totally
> un-Christian."  And then there was the incident
where
> he called Princess Diana   "Princess David."
>
>
>
>
> --- Ram Lau <ramlau@y...> wrote:
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Never a fan of Reagan. An Economics major, I always
> begin my judgement
> on Reagan with his tripling the national debt during
> his 8 consecutive
> deficit years. And the Cold War and the military
> spending were not the
> real reason for the deficit spending.
>
> The future generations will look at Reagan quite
> differently, and will
> most likely remember the baby boom generation with
> contempt and
> disrespect.
>
> Ram
>
>
> --- In prezveepsenator@yahoogroups.com, THOMAS
JOHNSON
> <AVRCRDNG@F...>
> wrote:
> > While  reading about the Harding administration
and
> > the Teapot Dome
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teapot_Dome
scandal,
> I
> > became re-acquainted with Fightin' Bob LaFollette
> >
>
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_M._La_Follette%2C_Sr.,
> >   who's primary association for me was as a thorn
in
> > Wilson's side. Although Harding was very popular
and
> > the scandal had lost the public's interest,
> Republican
> > LaFollette kept investigating through a Senate
> > committee, with Democrat Thomas Walsh as point
man.
> > Eventually the lies did not hold up, resulting in
> > imprisonment, suicides, and a disgraced
> > administration.
> > Fast forward 60 years to the Reagan administration
> and
> > the Iran-Contra scandal
> > ://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran-Contra_Affair   This
> > administration illegally traded arms for hostages,
> > with disastrous results reverberating even today.
> > Special prosecutor Walsh (ironically) granted
> immunity
> > to some key figures and everybody walked. Far from
> re
> > penitent, House Republicans impeached Bill
Clinton,
> > according to Representative Dana Rohrabacher
R-Cal,
> > primarily as payback for to the Democrats for
> pursuing
> > Iran-Contra in the first place.
> > In my opinion, Reagan did far more damage to our
> long
> > term interests than Harding, yet Reagan is ranked
> the
> > 11th best president  in Cspan's Survey of
> Presidential
> > Leadership Survey
> >
>
http://www.americanpresidents.org/survey/historians/,
> > comprised of prominent presidential historians,
and
> > Harding is ranked 40th of 41.
> > How different things might have been if Bob
> LaFollette
> > had towed the party line or if Lawrence Walsh had
> not.
> >
> > Tom Johnson
> > --- Ram Lau <ramlau@y...> wrote:
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------
> > Greg,
> >
> > Rand has plenty of fans. They've even set up the
Ayn
> > Rand Institute in
> > her name a decade ago:
> >
> > http://www.aynrand.org/
> >
> > She's the Milton Friedman of her era:
> >
> > "Ayn Rand (1905-1982) was an ardent advocate of
> > reason, rational
> > self-interest, individual rights and free-market
> > capitalism.
> >
> > ARI seeks to promote these principles,
spearheading
> a
> > "cultural
> > renaissance" that will reverse the anti-reason,
> > anti-individualism,
> > anti-freedom, anti-capitalist trends in today's
> > culture. The major
> > battleground in this fight for reason and
capitalism
> > is the
> > educational institutions�high schools, and above
> all,
> > the
> > universities, where students learn the ideas that
> > shape their lives.
> >
> > Ayn Rand's philosophy�known as
Objectivism�holds
> that
> > historical
> > trends are the inescapable product of philosophy.
To
> > reverse the
> > current political and economic trends in America
and
> > throughout the
> > world requires a reversal of our society's
> fundamental
> > philosophy."
> >
> > Ram
> >
> >
> > --- In prezveepsenator@yahoogroups.com, Greg
Cannon
> > <gregcannon1@y...>
> > wrote:
> > > I have vague knowledge of Rand's writings and
> > > philosophy. I think they both believed in what
> they
> > > thought of as libertarianism, but had very
> different
> > > views on what exactly that was. Goldman's allies
> > were
> > > nearly always on the left. She had many friends
> who
> > > were socialist and communist, though she'd
always
> > > disagree with them on many things. I think the
> main
> > > thing they agreed on was that private property
> > should
> > > be done away with, and that's one thing I'm sure
> > Rand
> > > would disagree with them on. Goldman also joined
> > them
> > > on more down-to-earth causes, like birth
control.
> > She
> > > delivered lectures on birth control, and
> apparently
> > > condoms were distributed at her lectures though
> > birth
> > > control devices like that weren't legal at the
> time.
> > >
> > > I don't know much about Rand's personal life.
Was
> > she
> > > as passionate about her beliefs as Goldman was?
> What
> > > was she like? For that matter, when did she
live?
> > >
> > > --- Ram Lau <ramlau@y...> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Your mention of Emma Goldman reminds me Ayn
> Rand,
> > > > surely a very
> > > > different personality. (Ann Coulter of her
> > > > generation?) I sometimes
> > > > wonder if the Red Scare had anything to do
with
> > the
> > > > imprisonment.
> > > >
> > > > Ram
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --- In prezveepsenator@yahoogroups.com, Greg
> > Cannon
> > > > <gregcannon1@y...>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > I don't know the details of Debs'
prosecution,
> > but
> > > > I
> > > > > recall reading that Coolidge eventually
> pardoned
> > > > him.
> > > > > And Debs did still get about a million votes
> in
> > > > 1920,
> > > > > though he was still in jail.
> > > > >
> > > > > The best (and really only) book I've read on
> the
> > > > use
> > > > > of the Espionage Act was the second volume
of
> > Emma
> > > > > Goldman's autobiography. As an immigrant,
she
> > was
> > > > not
> > > > > only jailed but also deported to the Soviet
> > Union
> > > > > (which she'd left in the 1880s) and never
> > allowed
> > > > to
> > > > > return to America, all because she'd made
> > speeches
> > > > > against the war and against the draft.
> Thousands
> > > > were
> > > > > deported at the same time as her. I recall
> that
> > > > her
> > > > > anger was more directed at Wilson's attorney
> > > > general
> > > > > than at Wilson himself.
> > > > >
> > > > > --- THOMAS JOHNSON <AVRCRDNG@F...> wrote:
> > > > > > I have read that Wilson was prone to use
> > > > > > the threat of prosecution of  sedition as
a
> > > > > > political
> > > > > > tool and was not above using propaganda.
I'm
> > > > curious
> > > > > > whether that it is   reasonable to assume
> that
> > > > Deb's
> > > > > > incarceration under the Espionage Act was
an
> > > > attempt
> > > > > > to lessen his impact on the 1920 race.
> > > > > > I found the image of a weeping Taft being
> the
> > > > last
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > leave TR's grave site pretty touching, and
> the
> > > > fact
> > > > > > that TR delivered a 50 minute speech,
> > > > immediately
> > > > > > after taking a bullet in the chest,
> > astounding.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Tom Johnson
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --- Ram Lau <ramlau@y...> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ---------------------------------
> > > > > > Because of his deep sense of fairness and
> > > > equality
> > > > > > that the original
> > > > > > Republican Party embraced, Taft made a
> superb
> > > > > > Supreme
> > > > > > Court Chief
> > > > > > Justice. I find it impossible to picture
> what
> > > > kind
> > > > > > of
> > > > > > Justice Bush or
> > > > > > Cheney would be, but I pray to God (and I
> only
> > > > > > bother
> > > > > > God when
> > > > > > necessary) that a Justice Bush/Cheney will
> > never
> > > > > > happen to mankind.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The 1912 election was a critical election.
> The
> > > > > > Democratic Party for
> > > > > > the first time experienced the progressive
> > > > elements
> > > > > > that Woodrow
> > > > > > Wilson and William Jennings Bryan
embraced,
> > > > while
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > Republican Party
> > > > > > began to turn from a center-left party to
> > > > something
> > > > > > totally different
> > > > > > half a century later. Here is the
transcript
> > of
> > > > the
> > > > > > BookTV interview
> > > > > > with the author of the book "1912: Wilson,
> > > > > > Roosevelt,
> > > > > > Taft, and Debs -
> > > > > > The Election That Changed the Country," a
> very
> > > > > > readable book:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/prezveepsenator/message/192
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Ram
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --- In prezveepsenator@yahoogroups.com,
> THOMAS
> > > > > > JOHNSON
> > > > > > <AVRCRDNG@F...>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > Greg and Ram and all, thanks for the
> > responses
> > > > and
> > > > > > > welcoming me into the group. I have
> > > > entertained
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > notion that perhaps the Taft presidency
> was
> > > > the
> > > > > > most
> > > > > > > analogous to our current inhabitant. He
> was
> > > > born
> > > > > > into
> > > > > > > political privilege, divisive, pious,
> > > > > > > anti-environment, and a pawn of the
party
> > > > > > machinery
> > > > > > > (TR claimed they stole the 1912
Republican
> > > > > > > nomination). I also  would have included
a
> > > > puppet
> > > > > > of
> > > > > > > big business, but after doing a little
> > reading
> > > > > > > tonight, he apparently  did some
> > > > trust-busting. He
> > > > > > > seems to have had a pretty good
> > > > post-presidency,
> > > > > > > including serving on the US Supreme
Court.
> I
> > > > also
> > > > > > find
> > > > > > > it heartening that he and TR, who had
been
> > > > close
> > > > > > > friends( Taft was TR's hand-picked
> > successor),
> > > > and
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > were able to have an amicable lunch
> together
> > > > > > before
> > > > > > > the latter's death , significant in
that
> in
> >
> > > > the
> > > > > > 1912
> > > > > > > primaries terms such as 'fathead' and
> > > > 'congenital
> > > > > > > liar' were thrown at each other.
> > > > > > >  I caught a bit of the Carl Sferrazza
> > Anthony
> > > > > > Cspan
> > > > > > > interview on the subject of Nellie Taft
> > that
> > > > Ram
> > > > > > > alluded to and  came away with feeling
> that
> > > > she
> > > > > > was
> > > > > > > pretty cool..thanks Ram for the link to
> see
> > > > the
> > > > > > whole
> > > > > > > segment and for the great Coolidge
> > interview,
> > > > the
> > > > > > Debs
> > > > > > > profile and for answering my question.
I'm
> > > > > > learning
> > > > > > a
> > > > > > > lot form you guys.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Tom Johnson
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --- Greg Cannon <gregcannon1@y...>
wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > ---------------------------------
> > > > > > > I can't answer your question, Tom,
though
> > I'd
> > > > also
> > > > > > > like to know the answer. Do you or
anyone
> > here
> > > > > > have
> > > > > > > suggestions on books or websites to do
> with
> > > > the
> > > > > > Taft
> > > > > > > administration? The Roosevelt biography
> I'm
> > > > > > reading
> > > > > > > has been mentioning Taft a lot, how
Teddy
> > > > began
> > > > > > > sending him on important missions and
> taking
> > > > Taft
> > > > > > into
> > > > > > > his confidence, at least as early as
1905
> > > > though
> > > > > > > probably earlier.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Roosevelt's occasional anti-trust
> > prosecutions
> > > > of
> > > > > > > monopolies raised quite a storm in his
> first
> > > > term,
> > > > > > but
> > > >
> > > === message truncated ===
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------
> >   YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
> >
> >
> >     Visit your group "prezveepsenator" on the web.
> >
> >     To unsubscribe from this group, send an email
> to:
> >  prezveepsenator-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> >
> >     Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the
> Yahoo!
> > Terms of Service.
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
>   YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
>
>
>     Visit your group "prezveepsenator" on the web.
>
>     To unsubscribe from this group, send an email
to:
>  prezveepsenator-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
>     Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the
Yahoo!
> Terms of Service.
>
>
> ---------------------------------




       SPONSORED LINKS

President bush
Supreme court justices
    President
                      Supreme court


---------------------------------
   YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS


     Visit your group "prezveepsenator" on the web.

     To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
  prezveepsenator-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

     Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo!
Terms of Service.


---------------------------------

I'm one of those Clark fans.

Ram


August dKos Straw Poll Results
by kos
Fri Aug 19th, 2005 at 11:30:08 PDT

Some movement this time.

dKos reader poll. 8/18-19. 8,710 respondents.

               August  July  June

Clark           35     34    26
Feingold        16     10    10
H. Clinton       9     10    10
No Freakin' Clue 9     13    17
Edwards          7      7     8
Richardson       4      4     4
Other            4      4     7
Biden            3      3     3
Warner           3      5     5
Bayh             1      2     2
Kerry            1      2     2
Vilsack          0      0     0

One of the striking elements of these polls is the consistency in
results. The Daily Kos community isn't representative of the overal
Democratic electorate, but with 8,000+ respondents, it's a miniscule
margin of error for our community's sentiments on the candidates.

So the big movement this time around was Feingold, who clearly got a
boost for demanding a firm timeline for a withdrawal from Iraq. It's
impossible to tell where his new support came from, but it's probably
the drop in undecideds probably benefited him.

Bowers saw a similar shift toward Feingold in the MyDD poll, which is
not comparable to this one (it uses IRV and includes fantasy
candidates like Schweitzer and Gore). Bowers concludes that perhaps
the Netroots might not be as non-ideological as I've been claiming.

     The first such question is whether or not the netroots really are
as non-ideological in their support of Democratic candidates as Markos
of Dailykos claims they are. My answer is no, though by no means a
complete departure from his position.

Problem is, Feingold still only at 16 percent, not exactly a ringing
netroots endorsement for his bold Iraq stance.

If we were a single-issue or ideology-driven community, Feingold would
be running away with this thing. He's unequivically against the war,
cast the lone vote against the Patriot Act, and is the only true
progressive in the current mix. And he can only muster 16 percent?

My thesis still holds. We are not an ideological community. We're a
practical one.

Update: In case anyone is wondering about Clark's rise in support in
July -- it was an issue of wording the question. I made clear in that
post that neither Dean nor Gore would be running in 2008, hence the
movement from "no freakin' clue" and "other" to Clark.

I supported Clark in 04. I'm a little surprised that
Edwards and Clinton didn't poll higher,
This from the David Ignatius column in today's
Washington Post:

What can the Democrats do to seize the opportunities
of the moment? I suggest they take a leaf from Newt
Gingrich's GOP playbook and develop a new "Contract
With America." The Democrats should put together a
clear and coherent list of measures they would
implement if they could regain control of Congress and
the White House. If the Democrats are serious, some of
these measures -- dealing with economics and energy --
will be unpopular because they will call for
sacrifice. But precisely for that reason, they will
show that the Democrats can transcend interest-group
America and unite the country.

I agree that they need to be disciplined and coherent
and something like the Contract With America is a good
idea, but asking for sacrifice is a recipe for defeat
and a Republican strategist's dream.. It can't be
explained on a bumper sticker. Ask Walter Mondale.
Paul Hackett is a great model for 2006.

Tom


--- Ram Lau <ramlau@...> wrote:


---------------------------------
I'm one of those Clark fans.

Ram


August dKos Straw Poll Results
by kos
Fri Aug 19th, 2005 at 11:30:08 PDT

Some movement this time.

dKos reader poll. 8/18-19. 8,710 respondents.

               August  July  June

Clark           35     34    26
Feingold        16     10    10
H. Clinton       9     10    10
No Freakin' Clue 9     13    17
Edwards          7      7     8
Richardson       4      4     4
Other            4      4     7
Biden            3      3     3
Warner           3      5     5
Bayh             1      2     2
Kerry            1      2     2
Vilsack          0      0     0

One of the striking elements of these polls is the
consistency in
results. The Daily Kos community isn't representative
of the overal
Democratic electorate, but with 8,000+ respondents,
it's a miniscule
margin of error for our community's sentiments on the
candidates.

So the big movement this time around was Feingold, who
clearly got a
boost for demanding a firm timeline for a withdrawal
from Iraq. It's
impossible to tell where his new support came from,
but it's probably
the drop in undecideds probably benefited him.

Bowers saw a similar shift toward Feingold in the MyDD
poll, which is
not comparable to this one (it uses IRV and includes
fantasy
candidates like Schweitzer and Gore). Bowers concludes
that perhaps
the Netroots might not be as non-ideological as I've
been claiming.

     The first such question is whether or not the
netroots really are
as non-ideological in their support of Democratic
candidates as Markos
of Dailykos claims they are. My answer is no, though
by no means a
complete departure from his position.

Problem is, Feingold still only at 16 percent, not
exactly a ringing
netroots endorsement for his bold Iraq stance.

If we were a single-issue or ideology-driven
community, Feingold would
be running away with this thing. He's unequivically
against the war,
cast the lone vote against the Patriot Act, and is the
only true
progressive in the current mix. And he can only muster
16 percent?

My thesis still holds. We are not an ideological
community. We're a
practical one.

Update: In case anyone is wondering about Clark's rise
in support in
July -- it was an issue of wording the question. I
made clear in that
post that neither Dean nor Gore would be running in
2008, hence the
movement from "no freakin' clue" and "other" to Clark.






       SPONSORED LINKS

President bush
Supreme court justices
    President
                      Supreme court


---------------------------------
   YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS


     Visit your group "prezveepsenator" on the web.

     To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
  prezveepsenator-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

     Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo!
Terms of Service.


---------------------------------

http://aolsvc.news.aol.com/news/article.adp?id=20050818234209990002
LBJ's 1964 Lincoln Sells for $94,000
HOUSTON (Aug. 19) - A Lincoln Continental convertible once owned by
former President Lyndon B. Johnson sold for $94,000 at auction
Thursday night in California.

Rik Pike, a spokesman for Christie's, said the sale price doubled the
pre-sale expectations. Pike couldn't immediately say who purchased the
vehicle or whether a Texan was the high bidder. But he said a number
of Texans had expressed interest in the car.

In 1964, when the car was new, the base sticker price was $6,938.

Johnson was known for driving his cars around his Hill Country ranch
like all-terrain vehicles, scaring the cattle. Historians say he loved
to drive and drive fast. And he often drove in a white Lincoln
Continental convertible.

The Lincoln was among 48 other cars up for auction.

"In collecting terms, having an interesting ownership, it's hard to
put a value on that," said Mark Donaldson, a Christie's car
specialist. "But it does make the car more attractive than one that
was owned by just an average Joe."

And 1960s-vintage Lincoln Continentals are seldom found in such mint
condition because they can cost more to restore than they are worth,
Donaldson said.

Historian Hal Rothman talks about Johnson's love for speed in his
book, "LBJ's Texas White House."

"All cars of any substance in those days were big and powerful, driven
by men who saw themselves as big and powerful," he said. "Your car was
a reflection of your manhood."

Rothman said that driving fast, sometimes off-road, gave Johnson a
release from the pressures of Washington.

The car that was auctioned was one of Johnson's fleet of Lincoln
convertibles; the Lyndon B. Johnson National Historical Park outside
Johnson City has 1966 and 1967 models on display, among other vehicles.

Austin lobbyist Nick Kralj owned the car for more than 15 years,
selling it about five years ago to a fellow Texan whom Christie's
officials identify only as "a private owner."

08/18/05 23:39 EDT

Copyright 2005 The Associated Press. The information contained in the
AP news report may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or otherwise
distributed without the prior written authority of The Associated Press.

He also liked drink beer when he drove.. Since that
was against the law, he had it changed and so, for
about 20 years, Texans were able to drink and drive
legally. We used to call it 'LBJin' it.'

--- Ram Lau <ramlau@...> wrote:


---------------------------------
http://aolsvc.news.aol.com/news/article.adp?id=20050818234209990002
LBJ's 1964 Lincoln Sells for $94,000
HOUSTON (Aug. 19) - A Lincoln Continental convertible
once owned by
former President Lyndon B. Johnson sold for $94,000 at
auction
Thursday night in California.

Rik Pike, a spokesman for Christie's, said the sale
price doubled the
pre-sale expectations. Pike couldn't immediately say
who purchased the
vehicle or whether a Texan was the high bidder. But he
said a number
of Texans had expressed interest in the car.

In 1964, when the car was new, the base sticker price
was $6,938.

Johnson was known for driving his cars around his Hill
Country ranch
like all-terrain vehicles, scaring the cattle.
Historians say he loved
to drive and drive fast. And he often drove in a white
Lincoln
Continental convertible.

The Lincoln was among 48 other cars up for auction.

"In collecting terms, having an interesting ownership,
it's hard to
put a value on that," said Mark Donaldson, a
Christie's car
specialist. "But it does make the car more attractive
than one that
was owned by just an average Joe."

And 1960s-vintage Lincoln Continentals are seldom
found in such mint
condition because they can cost more to restore than
they are worth,
Donaldson said.

Historian Hal Rothman talks about Johnson's love for
speed in his
book, "LBJ's Texas White House."

"All cars of any substance in those days were big and
powerful, driven
by men who saw themselves as big and powerful," he
said. "Your car was
a reflection of your manhood."

Rothman said that driving fast, sometimes off-road,
gave Johnson a
release from the pressures of Washington.

The car that was auctioned was one of Johnson's fleet
of Lincoln
convertibles; the Lyndon B. Johnson National
Historical Park outside
Johnson City has 1966 and 1967 models on display,
among other vehicles.

Austin lobbyist Nick Kralj owned the car for more than
15 years,
selling it about five years ago to a fellow Texan whom
Christie's
officials identify only as "a private owner."

08/18/05 23:39 EDT

Copyright 2005 The Associated Press. The information
contained in the
AP news report may not be published, broadcast,
rewritten or otherwise
distributed without the prior written authority of The
Associated Press.





       SPONSORED LINKS

President bush
Supreme court justices
    President
                      Supreme court


---------------------------------
   YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS


     Visit your group "prezveepsenator" on the web.

     To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
  prezveepsenator-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

     Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo!
Terms of Service.


---------------------------------

Sounds like a very LBJ thing to do for him. For this auction, I can
almost hear him yelling at Lady Bird, "Some sucker bought our old car
for 94 grands!" You know, the typical LBJ.

Ram


--- In prezveepsenator@yahoogroups.com, THOMAS JOHNSON <AVRCRDNG@F...>
wrote:
> He also liked drink beer when he drove.. Since that
> was against the law, he had it changed and so, for
> about 20 years, Texans were able to drink and drive
> legally. We used to call it 'LBJin' it.'
>
> --- Ram Lau <ramlau@y...> wrote:
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> http://aolsvc.news.aol.com/news/article.adp?id=20050818234209990002
> LBJ's 1964 Lincoln Sells for $94,000
> HOUSTON (Aug. 19) - A Lincoln Continental convertible
> once owned by
> former President Lyndon B. Johnson sold for $94,000 at
> auction
> Thursday night in California.
>
> Rik Pike, a spokesman for Christie's, said the sale
> price doubled the
> pre-sale expectations. Pike couldn't immediately say
> who purchased the
> vehicle or whether a Texan was the high bidder. But he
> said a number
> of Texans had expressed interest in the car.
>
> In 1964, when the car was new, the base sticker price
> was $6,938.
>
> Johnson was known for driving his cars around his Hill
> Country ranch
> like all-terrain vehicles, scaring the cattle.
> Historians say he loved
> to drive and drive fast. And he often drove in a white
> Lincoln
> Continental convertible.
>
> The Lincoln was among 48 other cars up for auction.
>
> "In collecting terms, having an interesting ownership,
> it's hard to
> put a value on that," said Mark Donaldson, a
> Christie's car
> specialist. "But it does make the car more attractive
> than one that
> was owned by just an average Joe."
>
> And 1960s-vintage Lincoln Continentals are seldom
> found in such mint
> condition because they can cost more to restore than
> they are worth,
> Donaldson said.
>
> Historian Hal Rothman talks about Johnson's love for
> speed in his
> book, "LBJ's Texas White House."
>
> "All cars of any substance in those days were big and
> powerful, driven
> by men who saw themselves as big and powerful," he
> said. "Your car was
> a reflection of your manhood."
>
> Rothman said that driving fast, sometimes off-road,
> gave Johnson a
> release from the pressures of Washington.
>
> The car that was auctioned was one of Johnson's fleet
> of Lincoln
> convertibles; the Lyndon B. Johnson National
> Historical Park outside
> Johnson City has 1966 and 1967 models on display,
> among other vehicles.
>
> Austin lobbyist Nick Kralj owned the car for more than
> 15 years,
> selling it about five years ago to a fellow Texan whom
> Christie's
> officials identify only as "a private owner."
>
> 08/18/05 23:39 EDT
>
> Copyright 2005 The Associated Press. The information
> contained in the
> AP news report may not be published, broadcast,
> rewritten or otherwise
> distributed without the prior written authority of The
> Associated Press.
>
>
>
>
>
>       SPONSORED LINKS
>
> President bush
> Supreme court justices
>    President
>                      Supreme court
>
>
> ---------------------------------
>   YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
>
>
>     Visit your group "prezveepsenator" on the web.
>
>     To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>  prezveepsenator-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
>     Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo!
> Terms of Service.
>
>
> ---------------------------------

Voting Rights Address by Lyndon Johnson in 1965:
http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/lbjweshallovercome.htm

I caught it on C-SPAN a couple of weeks ago. Here is a piece of excerpt:

"And somehow you never forget what poverty and hatred can do when you
see its scars on the hopeful face of a young child. I never thought
then, in 1928, that I would be standing here in 1965. It never even
occurred to me in my fondest dreams that I might have the chance to
help the sons and daughters of those students and to help people like
them all over this country.

But now I do have that chance -- and I'll let you in on a secret -- I
mean to use it."

I've studied LBJ for a few years, and I could see that he pretty much
meant what he said in that speech. He was sincere and very brave,
knowing it was a political suicide for his Party and would cost him
some political assets.

Ram

oops, sorry about the last posts....He meant it. For
me, the most remarkable about LBJ was his
post-presidency. Not for what he did, but for how he
changed. He moved back to central Texas and grew his
hair long, as if he was joining the anti-war movement.
  I'd like  to learn more about his decision- making
process on the Gulf of Tonkin. Anybody know anything
about that?

Tom



--- Ram Lau <ramlau@...> wrote:


---------------------------------
Voting Rights Address by Lyndon Johnson in 1965:
http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/lbjweshallovercome.htm

I caught it on C-SPAN a couple of weeks ago. Here is a
piece of excerpt:

"And somehow you never forget what poverty and hatred
can do when you
see its scars on the hopeful face of a young child. I
never thought
then, in 1928, that I would be standing here in 1965.
It never even
occurred to me in my fondest dreams that I might have
the chance to
help the sons and daughters of those students and to
help people like
them all over this country.

But now I do have that chance -- and I'll let you in
on a secret -- I
mean to use it."

I've studied LBJ for a few years, and I could see that
he pretty much
meant what he said in that speech. He was sincere and
very brave,
knowing it was a political suicide for his Party and
would cost him
some political assets.

Ram





       SPONSORED LINKS

President bush
Supreme court justices
    President
                      Supreme court


---------------------------------
   YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS


     Visit your group "prezveepsenator" on the web.

     To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
  prezveepsenator-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

     Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo!
Terms of Service.


---------------------------------

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB132/essay.htm
Essay: 40th Anniversary of the
Gulf of Tonkin Incident

by John Prados

Posted August 4, 2004


On this 40th anniversary of the Tonkin Gulf incident it is appropriate
to recall an affair that has much history wound around it, a watershed
in the U.S. move toward full-scale war in Vietnam. At the time, in
August 1964, the administration of President Lyndon B. Johnson used
the incident as a pretext to seek from Congress a joint resolution
approving the use of force in Southeast Asia, which it then relied
upon as legal justification for all-out war. The episode opened the
way for an American military commitment that ultimately peaked in
March 1969 with 548,000 U.S. troops in South Vietnam plus additional
supporting forces in Thailand. Some 59,000 Americans and several
million Vietnamese died in the conflict.

More recently, the Tonkin Gulf incident has regularly been invoked in
connection with the lead-up to the war in Iraq, where the
administration of President George W. Bush also cited threats to the
United States to obtain congressional approval for the use of force.
Those claims, too, proved to be based largely on seriously flawed
intelligence and possibly, according to some critics, manipulated. The
parallels to Tonkin make it all the more worthwhile to re-examine the
events of 40 years ago on the basis of newly acquired evidence.

Background

The particulars of the incidents of early August 1964, as reported by
the Johnson administration, were crucial to gaining the legislative
authority President Johnson sought, which came in the form of the
Tonkin Gulf Resolution. At the time and for some years afterward, the
United States government took the position that it had done nothing to
provoke a naval engagement in the Tonkin Gulf between North Vietnamese
and U.S. warships. The Johnson administration also maintained that it
had acted with restraint, refusing to respond to an initial North
Vietnamese attack on August 2, 1964, and reacting only after North
Vietnam made a second naval attack two nights later. Both of these
assertions turned out to be misleading.

In fact the United States at the time was carrying out a program of
covert naval commando attacks against North Vietnam and had been
engaged in this effort since its approval by Johnson in January 1964.
(For documentation of this program, carried out under Operations Plan
(OPLAN) 34-A, see the Tonkin Gulf subset of the National Security
Archive's microfiche collection, U.S. Policy in the Vietnam War, I:
1954-1968.) A fresh addition to the declassified record is the
intelligence estimate included in this briefing book, Special National
Intelligence Estimate 50-2-64. Published in May 1964, the estimate
again demonstrates that the United States purposefully directed OPLAN
34-A to pressure North Vietnam, to the extent of attempting to
anticipate Hanoi's reaction. It wrongly concluded that North Vietnam,
while taking precautionary measures, "might reduce the level of the
insurrections for the moment." (Note 1) In fact Hanoi decided instead
to commit its regular army forces to the fighting in South Vietnam.

The Johnson administration's characterization of the specifics of the
Tonkin Gulf incident has proven to be inaccurate. Administration
officials contended that the U.S. warship simply happened to be
cruising in the Gulf to exert a U.S. presence -- engaged in "innocent
passage" under international law. The naval battle between the
destroyer USS Maddox and several North Vietnamese torpedo boats
occurred on August 2, 1964, in the immediate aftermath of a series of
34-A maritime raids on North Vietnamese coastal targets. Among the
targets were two offshore islands, Hon Me and Hon Ngu, which were
closely approached by the Maddox prior to the August 2 engagement. The
American destroyer was in international waters when the battle itself
took place but the North Vietnamese made the logical connection that
the 34-A raids and the destroyer's appearance were related. In fact
the mission of the Maddox was specifically to record North Vietnamese
radar and other electronic emissions which could be expected to spike
after a 34-A raid.

Senior administration officials were well aware of the connection
between the 34-A raids and the destroyer's intelligence cruise, called
a "DeSoto Patrol." Secretary of Defense Robert S. McNamara, in his
very first telephone conversation with President Johnson about the
battle, at 10:30 a.m. Washington time on August 3, raised the issue.
LBJ wanted McNamara to hold a private briefing for congressional
leaders on Capitol Hill. McNamara replied, "I think I should also, or
we should also at that time, Mr. President, explain this OPLAN 34-A.
There's no question but what that had bearing on." (Note 2) McNamara
went on to describe the 34-A mission, including mention of the two
islands, the number of attack boats participating, their ammunition
expenditures, and other details.

Appearing before the legislators, Secretary McNamara did mention the
34-A raids but asserted they were South Vietnamese naval missions and
had nothing to do with the United States. In fact the 34-A missions
were unilaterally controlled by the U.S., using boats procured and
maintained by the U.S. Navy, attacking targets selected by the CIA, in
an operation paid for by the United States. The only South Vietnamese
aspect of 34-A was the administrative responsibility borne by that
government's special forces for their nationals recruited as the
commandos for the missions, commandos who were nevertheless led by
Americans. Some accounts by Americans who participated in such
missions actually maintain that Americans were present aboard the
attack boats during the raids of August 2. (Note 3)

Secretary McNamara not only advanced the fiction of 34-A as a South
Vietnamese enterprise in a private meeting with congressmen, he
repeated it at congressional hearings on the administration's
requested use of force resolution. At an executive session hearing
held on August 6, McNamara declared, "Our Navy played absolutely no
part in, was not associated with, was not aware of, any South
Vietnamese actions, if there were any." (Note 4) Controversy over
Johnson administration claims regarding the Gulf of Tonkin incident
began not long after the events themselves and grew over time, leading
to an unusual review of the events in a new set of hearings before the
Senate Foreign Relations Committee in February 1968. Secretary
McNamara again served as the administration's lead witness and claimed
that the issue of provocation had been "fully explored" at the 1964
hearings. Specifically, McNamara declared that Congress had
investigated whether the attacks "were in any way provoked by or
related to certain South Vietnamese naval activity." McNamara later
reasserted that the 34-A missions were "countermeasures being taken by
the South Vietnamese in response to North Vietnamese aggression."
(Note 5) These administration assertions were highly misleading as the
declassified documentary record of OPLAN 34-A makes abundantly clear.

The leading edge of doubt which ultimately forced the February 1968
review of the Gulf of Tonkin incident arose over whether a second
attack on U.S. warships had occurred on the night of August 4.
Following the initial naval battle of August 2, President Johnson
ordered a second U.S. destroyer, the USS C. Turner Joy, to join the
Maddox, after which both ships sailed back up the Gulf of Tonkin. On
the night of August 4, both ships thought they had come under attack
again and sent messages reporting enemy contacts, torpedoes in the
water, and so on, while directing a good deal of fire at the supposed
adversary. Following this supposed repeat challenge to "innocent
passage," President Johnson ordered retaliatory bombing against North
Vietnam and asked for the congressional resolution with which he
prosecuted the Vietnam war.

But the certainty of the "second attack" would never be so clear as
the first. The initial battle took place in daylight. There were
photographs of the North Vietnamese torpedo boats engaged in a
fire-fight with the Maddox, Admiral Thomas H. Moorer retained a dud
shell from one of the Vietnamese vessels as a souvenir, and numerous
Maddox sailors confirmed sighting at least three torpedoes. However,
there was no physical evidence at all for the August 4 attack claims.
The supposed surface action took place at night and in poor weather.
The skipper and four seamen aboard the C. Turner Joy variously claimed
having seen a searchlight, boat cockpit lights, smoke at a location
where they claimed their gunfire had hit a Vietnamese vessel in the
water, and one, or perhaps two, torpedo wakes. The Navy further
claimed their vessels had sunk two attacking torpedo boats. But there
was no wreckage, nor bodies of dead sailors. No photographs or other
physical evidence existed. Radar and sonar sightings provided an
exceedingly confusing set of data at best. (Note 6)

American pilots from the carrier USS Ticonderoga sent to help defend
the destroyers from their supposed attackers told the same story.
Commander James B. Stockdale, who led this flight of jets, spotted no
enemy, and at one point saw the Turner Joy pointing her guns at the
Maddox. As Stockdale, who retired an admiral after a distinguished
career that included being shot down and imprisoned by the North
Vietnamese, later wrote: "There was absolutely no gunfire except our
own, no PT boat wakes, not a candle light let alone a burning ship.
None could have been there and not have been seen on such a black
night." (Note 7) In his memoir, Stockdale also remarked on the
situation: "I had the best seat in the house from which to detect
boats-if there were any. I didn't have to look through surface haze
and spray like the destroyers did, and yet I could see the destroyers'
every move vividly." (Note 8) These comments reinforce the dispatches
from the Navy's on-scene commander, Captain John Herrick, who after
filing various reports of attacks sent a cable that questioned them
all. A Top Secret August 28, 1964 chronology prepared for President
Johnson summarized Herrick's report, sent at 1:27 p.m. Washington time
on August 4, as follows: "a review of the action makes many reported
contacts and torpedoes fired 'appear doubtful'. 'Freak weather
effects' on radar, and 'over-eager' sonarmen may have accounted for
many reports. 'No visual sightings' have been reported by the Maddox,
and the Commander suggests that a 'complete evaluation' be undertaken
before any further action." But Washington had already decided to
strike North Vietnam.

Stockdale's commentaries came after America's Vietnam war had ended,
but questions regarding the "second attack" were already strong enough
by 1968 to force renewed congressional attention. Secretary McNamara
pulled out a trump card during the 1968 hearings to silence doubters.
The trump was a set of communications intercepts made by the Naval
Security Group detachment on the destroyer Maddox, the very unit whose
presence defined this cruise as a DeSoto Patrol. As McNamara described
the intercepts in his testimony: "Intelligence reports from a highly
classified and unimpeachable source reported that North Vietnam was
making preparations to attack our destroyers with two Swatow [patrol]
boats and one PT boat if the PT could be made ready in time. The same
source reported, while the engagement was in progress on August 4,
that the attack was underway. Immediately after the attack ended, the
source reported that the North Vietnamese lost two ships in the
engagement." (Note 9)

Secretary McNamara played the intercepts very close to his chest.
Describing them only in general terms, he refused to leave copies with
the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Staff member J. Norvill Jones
later recalled that McNamara cited the staff's lack of proper
clearances as a reason, but also notes that McNamara's Pentagon had
stalled the Committee's investigation of Tonkin Gulf since 1965, and
had furnished some requested documents only after the intercession of
Senator Richard Russell of Georgia, the powerful chairman of the Armed
Services Committee and a close friend of Lyndon Johnson's. Years
later, Foreign Relations Committee Chairman J. William Fulbright was
finally able to arrange with the Nixon administration for Jones and
staff director Carl Marcy to actually view the intercepts. Jones'
reaction is important to record:

     Of the several messages we were allowed to scan, only one was from
August 4. The others clearly related to the incident on August 2.

     My reading of the Aug. 4 intercept was that it was a boastful
summary of the attack on August 2. Even the NSA [National Security
Agency] officials could not say that it definitely related to the Aug.
4 action. In addition the time sequence of the intercept and the
reported action from the U.S. destroyers did not jibe. Curiously, NSA
could not find the original of the Aug. 4 intercept, although it did
have originals of the others. (Note 10)

A 1980s investigation of these events by reporters for U.S. News and
World Report found intelligence officers who agreed with Jones'
reading of the Tonkin Gulf intercepts. They quoted Ray S. Cline, who
at the time headed the CIA's Intelligence Directorate and would later
become chief of the State Department's Bureau of Intelligence and
Research: "I began to see that the [intercepts] which were being
received at the time of the second attack almost certainly could not
have referred to the second attack because of the time differences
involved. Things were being referred to which, although they might
have been taking place at that time, could not have been reported back
so quickly." (Note 11) Also suspect was the fact that intercepts from
August 2 had been recorded widely by NSA stations as well as the
Maddox while those of the 4th reportedly were recorded only by a
listening post at Phu Bai in South Vietnam. Louis Tordella,
long-serving deputy director of the National Security Agency, was
among those intelligence officers who discount the validity of the
August 4 intercepts.

New Evidence

Now, forty years later, Americans for the first time have the
opportunity to make up their own minds on the Tonkin Gulf intercepts.
After repeated requests using the Mandatory Declassification Review
process, this analyst was able to get them declassified in March 2003.

The cables included here are the relevant NSA intercepts. In the
immediate aftermath of the "crisis," the White House asked for the
intercepted radio traffic and it was sent over. A cover note for
National Security Adviser McGeorge Bundy on August 8 reads: "Last
night the White House Situation Room relayed a request from Mr. Bundy
for all intercepts which preceded and related to the second attack on
the Maddox and Turner Joy. The attached messages were selected by CIA
and NSA." (Note 12) The note covered a list that contained the exact
items reproduced here, including the five (out of eight) which have
been declassified as of this writing.

A review of the documents will make clear that the cables were not raw
intercepts of North Vietnamese radio traffic but rather reports from
the intercepting units on the Maddox and elsewhere which summarize the
contents of the raw intercepts. This point is important because it
means that the infamous intercepts could not have been simultaneously
passed along to the Hawaii headquarters of the Commander-in-Chief
Pacific or to Washington. Radio intelligence units had to perform
three activities before the information could be passed up the chain
of command: the intercepts themselves had to be recorded, the North
Vietnamese communications had to be decoded and translated, and a
message had to be assembled using the new information. Of course,
those messages themselves had then to be coded and encrypted in U.S.
systems before being transmitted on American radio nets. All this is
crucial to bear in mind because claims as to the unimpeachability of
the intelligence advanced by the Johnson administration turn on
comparisons of the time these messages were sent versus the times that
Captain Herrick and his destroyers reported various actions supposedly
taking place in the Tonkin Gulf.

Since time is literally of the essence here, the reader should
understand how to interpret the times printed on these messages. All
United States military traffic is sent using "Zulu" time, or Greenwich
Mean Time (GMT), and each message contains a "date/time group" that
identifies the time of transmission. Messages are frequently referred
to by their date/time groups in official commentaries and in
references in subsequent message traffic. A date/time group is
composed first of two numbers identifying a day, then of four numbers
that show the hour and minute (using a twenty-four hour clock).
Sometimes messages also list the month and the year, the latter
indicated by two final numbers. Thus "03/1211Z Aug" refers to 12:11
p.m. GMT on August 3, 1964. Local time in the Tonkin Gulf is seven
hours ahead of GMT, and twelve hours ahead of Washington, DC. The
date/time above therefore equates to 7:11 p.m. on August 3 in the
Tonkin Gulf, and 7:11 a.m. on August 3 in Washington. Keep these time
differences in mind when examining the message traffic below.

Not mentioned thus far in regard to possible U.S. provocation is the
fact that 34-A forces carried out another raid on North Vietnam during
the night of August 3/4, when the U.S. destroyers were beginning their
run back up the Tonkin Gulf. If Hanoi was responding to the first
raid, a second one furnished an equivalent reason to act against the
reinforced DeSoto Patrol. Yet, it appears Hanoi decided not to act.
North Vietnamese officials, including Defense Minister General Vo
Nguyen Giap, explained at a retrospective international conference in
1997 that their August 2 response had been ordered by a local naval
command, not the Hanoi leadership. (Note 13) The Vietnamese said they
had mounted no naval sortie on the 4th. This is consistent. Concerned
at the severity of the U.S. reaction to the August 2 engagement, the
Hanoi leadership could very well have made sure not to mount a
subsequent operation, even in the face of a second 34-A coastal raid.

Congressional staffer Jones and others are quite right to observe that
a number of the intercepts describe the naval action of August 2. In
that battle there were shootouts between North Vietnamese torpedo
boats and U.S. aircraft, and two of the North Vietnamese boats were
sunk, as described in one of the messages. Another message describes a
sighting of "two enemy assault vessels" east of the island of Hon Me.
The time of day reported in the message, 8:28 p.m. local (message
03/1328Z), actually corresponds very closely to the time, 9:35 p.m.,
when the Maddox had been in this position on August 1, prior to the
initial naval engagement. That time is recorded on track charts of the
Maddox's position in the official U.S. Navy history for this period of
the Vietnam war. (Note 14) The two destroyers traveling together were
near Hon Me only in mid-afternoon of August 4. Hon Me had been one of
the targets of the initial 34-A maritime operation, which had hit at
half past midnight, July 31 -- a rather close connection. The North
Vietnamese message had included orders to naval officers to shadow the
Americans.

The next message in the series (04/1140Z) reports a preparatory order
to two North Vietnamese patrol boats to prepare for operations and
informs them that a torpedo boat, the T-333, may join them if it can
be made ready in time. Three minutes later there was a sighting report
for a U.S. destroyer. This sounds like possible support for the
hypothesis that the North Vietnamese fought Americans again on August
4, but only until the American side is also examined. Captain
Herrick's destroyers first reported radar sightings in a message with
the date/time group 04/1240Z. The base for the North Vietnamese Swatow
patrol vessels referenced in these messages was at Quang Khe, near
Dong Hoi, roughly 110 nautical miles from Hon Me. Not even a
well-maintained and fully fuelled Swatow able to sustain its maximum
speed of over 40 knots could cover that distance from Quang Khe in the
time interval between the intercepts and the U.S. message.

Meanwhile, in Washington, at 9:43 a.m. on August 4, Secretary McNamara
had another conversation with President Johnson. Their discussion
reflects McNamara's knowledge of the intercepts where he says,
referring to the U.S. destroyer (McNamara uses the singular), "this
ship is allegedly, uh, to be attacked tonight." (Note 15) McNamara and
the president went on to discuss what retaliation they could carry out
for the attack (that had not happened), including bombing targets in
North Vietnam or undertaking more 34-A maritime assaults. An hour
later, when McNamara called in the first report that the alleged
attack had begun, he was already prepared with a list of options.

Much of the supposed action of August 4 occurred between the U.S.
message just mentioned and another from Captain Herrick at 04/1602Z,
in which the destroyers reported having evaded torpedoes and to having
"sunk" at least one attacking surface craft. It was during this time
that the wild melee of radar and sonar observations and heavy gunfire
occurred, and that Commander Stockdale's aircraft saw nothing. The
next of the NSA intercepts is recorded at 04/1630Z. It summarized the
North Vietnamese reporting about having shot at aircraft and observing
one fall into the sea, with "an enemy vessel perhaps wounded." An
amplification message followed at 04/1644Z admitting "we sacrificed
two comrades," and specifying they had fired at two aircraft. That
matched the events of August 2, when there had been exchanges between
the Vietnamese torpedo boats and U.S. planes, and when the Maddox had
been hit by at least some small-caliber cannon shells from the North
Vietnamese torpedo boats. The reports did not match the facts of
August 4, when no boats had passed beneath the U.S. planes to shoot at
them. The history of U.S. destroyers carried on the Navy's official
website no longer contains any reference to a naval engagement having
occurred on August 4.

The last two messages in this set (05/0438Z, 05/0627Z) show the North
Vietnamese Swatow boats to have regrouped at Hon Me island with a
couple of torpedo boats and to have received orders for some action to
be carried out in the northern Gulf of Tonkin in the afternoon of
August 5. By that time Captain Herrick's DeSoto Patrol had cleared the
Gulf and was no longer a factor.

An equally plausible construction of the events pictured in these
intercepts is that the North Vietnamese, in the face of the 34-A
maritime raids and sudden appearance of a heavy U.S. warship, ordered
their Swatow patrol boats to rendezvous at Hon Me with surviving
torpedo boats in preparation for defensive action against the U.S.
destroyers, by then gone. It is not probable that the North
Vietnamese, who knew from official U.S. statements that Captain
Herrick had been reinforced, would have sent their Swatow boats, with
no armament capable of sinking a destroyer (machineguns and light
cannon only, no torpedoes), against the strengthened U.S. destroyer
force. The intercepts themselves confirm that the torpedo boat T-333,
the only survivor of the August 2 battle, was not ready to sail at the
critical moment on August 4, when Hanoi could have set up a battle for
that day.

Conclusion

Among the most prophetic and disturbing statements in the declassified
record are those by national security adviser McGeorge Bundy, at the
White House staff meeting at 8 a.m. on August 5, 1964. Bundy told the
staff, according to the memorandum for the record drafted by military
aide William Y. Smith: "On the first attack, the evidence would be
pretty good. On the second one the amount of evidence we have today is
less than we had yesterday. This resulted primarily from correlating
bits and pieces of information eliminating double counting and
mistaken signals. This much seemed certain: There was an attack. How
many PT boats were involved, how many torpedoes were fired, etc. - all
this was still somewhat uncertain. This matter may be of some
importance since Hanoi has denied making the second attack." We now
know this denial was accurate and Washington's claims were not, and
that senior officials knew of the "double counting and mistaken
signals." But when new staffer Douglass Cater - attending his first
morning meeting on August 5, 1964 - questioned the need for a
Congressional resolution, "Bundy, in reply, jokingly told him perhaps
the matter should not be thought through too far. For his own part, he
welcomed the recent events as justification for a resolution the
Administration had wanted for some time."

Change a few of the words in these quotes - perhaps substitute
"weapons of mass destruction" for "PT boats" and "torpedoes," and
"Baghdad" for "Hanoi" - and the parallels with today become all too apt.

This new evidence permits us to view more accurately the internal
deliberations of the Johnson administration. Especially in combination
with LBJ's telephone conversations with McNamara, recently made
available to the public with transcriptions, the material clearly
shows Washington rushing to a judgment on events in the Tonkin Gulf,
which it seized upon as evidence in support of its predetermined
intention to escalate the conflict in Vietnam. Those who questioned
the veracity of the Johnson administration's description of the Gulf
of Tonkin incident at the time were right to do so. The manipulation
of this international situation for the administration's political
purpose of obtaining a congressional authorization for the use of
force bears considerable similarity to the manner in which the Bush
administration manipulated intelligence regarding the possibility that
Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction to gain its own legislative
approval for war against that country. (Note 16) In both cases, truth
became the first casualty. In both cases, the consequences far
outweighed anything anticipated by the presidents involved.

Thanks for sending the info, Ram.

Tom



--- Ram Lau <ramlau@...> wrote:


---------------------------------
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB132/essay.htm
Essay: 40th Anniversary of the
Gulf of Tonkin Incident

by John Prados

Posted August 4, 2004


On this 40th anniversary of the Tonkin Gulf incident
it is appropriate
to recall an affair that has much history wound around
it, a watershed
in the U.S. move toward full-scale war in Vietnam. At
the time, in
August 1964, the administration of President Lyndon B.
Johnson used
the incident as a pretext to seek from Congress a
joint resolution
approving the use of force in Southeast Asia, which it
then relied
upon as legal justification for all-out war. The
episode opened the
way for an American military commitment that
ultimately peaked in
March 1969 with 548,000 U.S. troops in South Vietnam
plus additional
supporting forces in Thailand. Some 59,000 Americans
and several
million Vietnamese died in the conflict.

More recently, the Tonkin Gulf incident has regularly
been invoked in
connection with the lead-up to the war in Iraq, where
the
administration of President George W. Bush also cited
threats to the
United States to obtain congressional approval for the
use of force.
Those claims, too, proved to be based largely on
seriously flawed
intelligence and possibly, according to some critics,
manipulated. The
parallels to Tonkin make it all the more worthwhile to
re-examine the
events of 40 years ago on the basis of newly acquired
evidence.

Background

The particulars of the incidents of early August 1964,
as reported by
the Johnson administration, were crucial to gaining
the legislative
authority President Johnson sought, which came in the
form of the
Tonkin Gulf Resolution. At the time and for some years
afterward, the
United States government took the position that it had
done nothing to
provoke a naval engagement in the Tonkin Gulf between
North Vietnamese
and U.S. warships. The Johnson administration also
maintained that it
had acted with restraint, refusing to respond to an
initial North
Vietnamese attack on August 2, 1964, and reacting only
after North
Vietnam made a second naval attack two nights later.
Both of these
assertions turned out to be misleading.

In fact the United States at the time was carrying out
a program of
covert naval commando attacks against North Vietnam
and had been
engaged in this effort since its approval by Johnson
in January 1964.
(For documentation of this program, carried out under
Operations Plan
(OPLAN) 34-A, see the Tonkin Gulf subset of the
National Security
Archive's microfiche collection, U.S. Policy in the
Vietnam War, I:
1954-1968.) A fresh addition to the declassified
record is the
intelligence estimate included in this briefing book,
Special National
Intelligence Estimate 50-2-64. Published in May 1964,
the estimate
again demonstrates that the United States purposefully
directed OPLAN
34-A to pressure North Vietnam, to the extent of
attempting to
anticipate Hanoi's reaction. It wrongly concluded that
North Vietnam,
while taking precautionary measures, "might reduce the
level of the
insurrections for the moment." (Note 1) In fact Hanoi
decided instead
to commit its regular army forces to the fighting in
South Vietnam.

The Johnson administration's characterization of the
specifics of the
Tonkin Gulf incident has proven to be inaccurate.
Administration
officials contended that the U.S. warship simply
happened to be
cruising in the Gulf to exert a U.S. presence --
engaged in "innocent
passage" under international law. The naval battle
between the
destroyer USS Maddox and several North Vietnamese
torpedo boats
occurred on August 2, 1964, in the immediate aftermath
of a series of
34-A maritime raids on North Vietnamese coastal
targets. Among the
targets were two offshore islands, Hon Me and Hon Ngu,
which were
closely approached by the Maddox prior to the August 2
engagement. The
American destroyer was in international waters when
the battle itself
took place but the North Vietnamese made the logical
connection that
the 34-A raids and the destroyer's appearance were
related. In fact
the mission of the Maddox was specifically to record
North Vietnamese
radar and other electronic emissions which could be
expected to spike
after a 34-A raid.

Senior administration officials were well aware of the
connection
between the 34-A raids and the destroyer's
intelligence cruise, called
a "DeSoto Patrol." Secretary of Defense Robert S.
McNamara, in his
very first telephone conversation with President
Johnson about the
battle, at 10:30 a.m. Washington time on August 3,
raised the issue.
LBJ wanted McNamara to hold a private briefing for
congressional
leaders on Capitol Hill. McNamara replied, "I think I
should also, or
we should also at that time, Mr. President, explain
this OPLAN 34-A.
There's no question but what that had bearing on."
(Note 2) McNamara
went on to describe the 34-A mission, including
mention of the two
islands, the number of attack boats participating,
their ammunition
expenditures, and other details.

Appearing before the legislators, Secretary McNamara
did mention the
34-A raids but asserted they were South Vietnamese
naval missions and
had nothing to do with the United States. In fact the
34-A missions
were unilaterally controlled by the U.S., using boats
procured and
maintained by the U.S. Navy, attacking targets
selected by the CIA, in
an operation paid for by the United States. The only
South Vietnamese
aspect of 34-A was the administrative responsibility
borne by that
government's special forces for their nationals
recruited as the
commandos for the missions, commandos who were
nevertheless led by
Americans. Some accounts by Americans who participated
in such
missions actually maintain that Americans were present
aboard the
attack boats during the raids of August 2. (Note 3)

Secretary McNamara not only advanced the fiction of
34-A as a South
Vietnamese enterprise in a private meeting with
congressmen, he
repeated it at congressional hearings on the
administration's
requested use of force resolution. At an executive
session hearing
held on August 6, McNamara declared, "Our Navy played
absolutely no
part in, was not associated with, was not aware of,
any South
Vietnamese actions, if there were any." (Note 4)
Controversy over
Johnson administration claims regarding the Gulf of
Tonkin incident
began not long after the events themselves and grew
over time, leading
to an unusual review of the events in a new set of
hearings before the
Senate Foreign Relations Committee in February 1968.
Secretary
McNamara again served as the administration's lead
witness and claimed
that the issue of provocation had been "fully
explored" at the 1964
hearings. Specifically, McNamara declared that
Congress had
investigated whether the attacks "were in any way
provoked by or
related to certain South Vietnamese naval activity."
McNamara later
reasserted that the 34-A missions were
"countermeasures being taken by
the South Vietnamese in response to North Vietnamese
aggression."
(Note 5) These administration assertions were highly
misleading as the
declassified documentary record of OPLAN 34-A makes
abundantly clear.

The leading edge of doubt which ultimately forced the
February 1968
review of the Gulf of Tonkin incident arose over
whether a second
attack on U.S. warships had occurred on the night of
August 4.
Following the initial naval battle of August 2,
President Johnson
ordered a second U.S. destroyer, the USS C. Turner
Joy, to join the
Maddox, after which both ships sailed back up the Gulf
of Tonkin. On
the night of August 4, both ships thought they had
come under attack
again and sent messages reporting enemy contacts,
torpedoes in the
water, and so on, while directing a good deal of fire
at the supposed
adversary. Following this supposed repeat challenge to
"innocent
passage," President Johnson ordered retaliatory
bombing against North
Vietnam and asked for the congressional resolution
with which he
prosecuted the Vietnam war.

But the certainty of the "second attack" would never
be so clear as
the first. The initial battle took place in daylight.
There were
photographs of the North Vietnamese torpedo boats
engaged in a
fire-fight with the Maddox, Admiral Thomas H. Moorer
retained a dud
shell from one of the Vietnamese vessels as a
souvenir, and numerous
Maddox sailors confirmed sighting at least three
torpedoes. However,
there was no physical evidence at all for the August 4
attack claims.
The supposed surface action took place at night and in
poor weather.
The skipper and four seamen aboard the C. Turner Joy
variously claimed
having seen a searchlight, boat cockpit lights, smoke
at a location
where they claimed their gunfire had hit a Vietnamese
vessel in the
water, and one, or perhaps two, torpedo wakes. The
Navy further
claimed their vessels had sunk two attacking torpedo
boats. But there
was no wreckage, nor bodies of dead sailors. No
photographs or other
physical evidence existed. Radar and sonar sightings
provided an
exceedingly confusing set of data at best. (Note 6)

American pilots from the carrier USS Ticonderoga sent
to help defend
the destroyers from their supposed attackers told the
same story.
Commander James B. Stockdale, who led this flight of
jets, spotted no
enemy, and at one point saw the Turner Joy pointing
her guns at the
Maddox. As Stockdale, who retired an admiral after a
distinguished
career that included being shot down and imprisoned by
the North
Vietnamese, later wrote: "There was absolutely no
gunfire except our
own, no PT boat wakes, not a candle light let alone a
burning ship.
None could have been there and not have been seen on
such a black
night." (Note 7) In his memoir, Stockdale also
remarked on the
situation: "I had the best seat in the house from
which to detect
boats-if there were any. I didn't have to look through
surface haze
and spray like the destroyers did, and yet I could see
the destroyers'
every move vividly." (Note 8) These comments reinforce
the dispatches
from the Navy's on-scene commander, Captain John
Herrick, who after
filing various reports of attacks sent a cable that
questioned them
all. A Top Secret August 28, 1964 chronology prepared
for President
Johnson summarized Herrick's report, sent at 1:27 p.m.
Washington time
on August 4, as follows: "a review of the action makes
many reported
contacts and torpedoes fired 'appear doubtful'. 'Freak
weather
effects' on radar, and 'over-eager' sonarmen may have
accounted for
many reports. 'No visual sightings' have been reported
by the Maddox,
and the Commander suggests that a 'complete
evaluation' be undertaken
before any further action." But Washington had already
decided to
strike North Vietnam.

Stockdale's commentaries came after America's Vietnam
war had ended,
but questions regarding the "second attack" were
already strong enough
by 1968 to force renewed congressional attention.
Secretary McNamara
pulled out a trump card during the 1968 hearings to
silence doubters.
The trump was a set of communications intercepts made
by the Naval
Security Group detachment on the destroyer Maddox, the
very unit whose
presence defined this cruise as a DeSoto Patrol. As
McNamara described
the intercepts in his testimony: "Intelligence reports
from a highly
classified and unimpeachable source reported that
North Vietnam was
making preparations to attack our destroyers with two
Swatow [patrol]
boats and one PT boat if the PT could be made ready in
time. The same
source reported, while the engagement was in progress
on August 4,
that the attack was underway. Immediately after the
attack ended, the
source reported that the North Vietnamese lost two
ships in the
engagement." (Note 9)

Secretary McNamara played the intercepts very close to
his chest.
Describing them only in general terms, he refused to
leave copies with
the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Staff member
J. Norvill Jones
later recalled that McNamara cited the staff's lack of
proper
clearances as a reason, but also notes that McNamara's
Pentagon had
stalled the Committee's investigation of Tonkin Gulf
since 1965, and
had furnished some requested documents only after the
intercession of
Senator Richard Russell of Georgia, the powerful
chairman of the Armed
Services Committee and a close friend of Lyndon
Johnson's. Years
later, Foreign Relations Committee Chairman J. William
Fulbright was
finally able to arrange with the Nixon administration
for Jones and
staff director Carl Marcy to actually view the
intercepts. Jones'
reaction is important to record:

     Of the several messages we were allowed to scan,
only one was from
August 4. The others clearly related to the incident
on August 2.

     My reading of the Aug. 4 intercept was that it was
a boastful
summary of the attack on August 2. Even the NSA
[National Security
Agency] officials could not say that it definitely
related to the Aug.
4 action. In addition the time sequence of the
intercept and the
reported action from the U.S. destroyers did not jibe.
Curiously, NSA
could not find the original of the Aug. 4 intercept,
although it did
have originals of the others. (Note 10)

A 1980s investigation of these events by reporters for
U.S. News and
World Report found intelligence officers who agreed
with Jones'
reading of the Tonkin Gulf intercepts. They quoted Ray
S. Cline, who
at the time headed the CIA's Intelligence Directorate
and would later
become chief of the State Department's Bureau of
Intelligence and
Research: "I began to see that the [intercepts] which
were being
received at the time of the second attack almost
certainly could not
have referred to the second attack because of the time
differences
involved. Things were being referred to which,
although they might
have been taking place at that time, could not have
been reported back
so quickly." (Note 11) Also suspect was the fact that
intercepts from
August 2 had been recorded widely by NSA stations as
well as the
Maddox while those of the 4th reportedly were recorded
only by a
listening post at Phu Bai in South Vietnam. Louis
Tordella,
long-serving deputy director of the National Security
Agency, was
among those intelligence officers who discount the
validity of the
August 4 intercepts.

New Evidence

Now, forty years later, Americans for the first time
have the
opportunity to make up their own minds on the Tonkin
Gulf intercepts.
After repeated requests using the Mandatory
Declassification Review
process, this analyst was able to get them
declassified in March 2003.

The cables included here are the relevant NSA
intercepts. In the
immediate aftermath of the "crisis," the White House
asked for the
intercepted radio traffic and it was sent over. A
cover note for
National Security Adviser McGeorge Bundy on August 8
reads: "Last
night the White House Situation Room relayed a request
from Mr. Bundy
for all intercepts which preceded and related to the
second attack on
the Maddox and Turner Joy. The attached messages were
selected by CIA
and NSA." (Note 12) The note covered a list that
contained the exact
items reproduced here, including the five (out of
eight) which have
been declassified as of this writing.

A review of the documents will make clear that the
cables were not raw
intercepts of North Vietnamese radio traffic but
rather reports from
the intercepting units on the Maddox and elsewhere
which summarize the
contents of the raw intercepts. This point is
important because it
means that the infamous intercepts could not have been
simultaneously
passed along to the Hawaii headquarters of the
Commander-in-Chief
Pacific or to Washington. Radio intelligence units had
to perform
three activities before the information could be
passed up the chain
of command: the intercepts themselves had to be
recorded, the North
Vietnamese communications had to be decoded and
translated, and a
message had to be assembled using the new information.
Of course,
those messages themselves had then to be coded and
encrypted in U.S.
systems before being transmitted on American radio
nets. All this is
crucial to bear in mind because claims as to the
unimpeachability of
the intelligence advanced by the Johnson
administration turn on
comparisons of the time these messages were sent
versus the times that
Captain Herrick and his destroyers reported various
actions supposedly
taking place in the Tonkin Gulf.

Since time is literally of the essence here, the
reader should
understand how to interpret the times printed on these
messages. All
United States military traffic is sent using "Zulu"
time, or Greenwich
Mean Time (GMT), and each message contains a
"date/time group" that
identifies the time of transmission. Messages are
frequently referred
to by their date/time groups in official commentaries
and in
references in subsequent message traffic. A date/time
group is
composed first of two numbers identifying a day, then
of four numbers
that show the hour and minute (using a twenty-four
hour clock).
Sometimes messages also list the month and the year,
the latter
indicated by two final numbers. Thus "03/1211Z Aug"
refers to 12:11
p.m. GMT on August 3, 1964. Local time in the Tonkin
Gulf is seven
hours ahead of GMT, and twelve hours ahead of
Washington, DC. The
date/time above therefore equates to 7:11 p.m. on
August 3 in the
Tonkin Gulf, and 7:11 a.m. on August 3 in Washington.
Keep these time
differences in mind when examining the message traffic
below.

Not mentioned thus far in regard to possible U.S.
provocation is the
fact that 34-A forces carried out another raid on
North Vietnam during
the night of August 3/4, when the U.S. destroyers were
beginning their
run back up the Tonkin Gulf. If Hanoi was responding
to the first
raid, a second one furnished an equivalent reason to
act against the
reinforced DeSoto Patrol. Yet, it appears Hanoi
decided not to act.
North Vietnamese officials, including Defense Minister
General Vo
Nguyen Giap, explained at a retrospective
international conference in
1997 that their August 2 response had been ordered by
a local naval
command, not the Hanoi leadership. (Note 13) The
Vietnamese said they
had mounted no naval sortie on the 4th. This is
consistent. Concerned
at the severity of the U.S. reaction to the August 2
engagement, the
Hanoi leadership could very well have made sure not to
mount a
subsequent operation, even in the face of a second
34-A coastal raid.

Congressional staffer Jones and others are quite right
to observe that
a number of the intercepts describe the naval action
of August 2. In
that battle there were shootouts between North
Vietnamese torpedo
boats and U.S. aircraft, and two of the North
Vietnamese boats were
sunk, as described in one of the messages. Another
message describes a
sighting of "two enemy assault vessels" east of the
island of Hon Me.
The time of day reported in the message, 8:28 p.m.
local (message
03/1328Z), actually corresponds very closely to the
time, 9:35 p.m.,
when the Maddox had been in this position on August 1,
prior to the
initial naval engagement. That time is recorded on
track charts of the
Maddox's position in the official U.S. Navy history
for this period of
the Vietnam war. (Note 14) The two destroyers
traveling together were
near Hon Me only in mid-afternoon of August 4. Hon Me
had been one of
the targets of the initial 34-A maritime operation,
which had hit at
half past midnight, July 31 -- a rather close
connection. The North
Vietnamese message had included orders to naval
officers to shadow the
Americans.

The next message in the series (04/1140Z) reports a
preparatory order
to two North Vietnamese patrol boats to prepare for
operations and
informs them that a torpedo boat, the T-333, may join
them if it can
be made ready in time. Three minutes later there was a
sighting report
for a U.S. destroyer. This sounds like possible
support for the
hypothesis that the North Vietnamese fought Americans
again on August
4, but only until the American side is also examined.
Captain
Herrick's destroyers first reported radar sightings in
a message with
the date/time group 04/1240Z. The base for the North
Vietnamese Swatow
patrol vessels referenced in these messages was at
Quang Khe, near
Dong Hoi, roughly 110 nautical miles from Hon Me. Not
even a
well-maintained and fully fuelled Swatow able to
sustain its maximum
speed of over 40 knots could cover that distance from
Quang Khe in the
time interval between the intercepts and the U.S.
message.

Meanwhile, in Washington, at 9:43 a.m. on August 4,
Secretary McNamara
had another conversation with President Johnson. Their
discussion
reflects McNamara's knowledge of the intercepts where
he says,
referring to the U.S. destroyer (McNamara uses the
singular), "this
ship is allegedly, uh, to be attacked tonight." (Note
15) McNamara and
the president went on to discuss what retaliation they
could carry out
for the attack (that had not happened), including
bombing targets in
North Vietnam or undertaking more 34-A maritime
assaults. An hour
later, when McNamara called in the first report that
the alleged
attack had begun, he was already prepared with a list
of options.

Much of the supposed action of August 4 occurred
between the U.S.
message just mentioned and another from Captain
Herrick at 04/1602Z,
in which the destroyers reported having evaded
torpedoes and to having
"sunk" at least one attacking surface craft. It was
during this time
that the wild melee of radar and sonar observations
and heavy gunfire
occurred, and that Commander Stockdale's aircraft saw
nothing. The
next of the NSA intercepts is recorded at 04/1630Z. It
summarized the
North Vietnamese reporting about having shot at
aircraft and observing
one fall into the sea, with "an enemy vessel perhaps
wounded." An
amplification message followed at 04/1644Z admitting
"we sacrificed
two comrades," and specifying they had fired at two
aircraft. That
matched the events of August 2, when there had been
exchanges between
the Vietnamese torpedo boats and U.S. planes, and when
the Maddox had
been hit by at least some small-caliber cannon shells
from the North
Vietnamese torpedo boats. The reports did not match
the facts of
August 4, when no boats had passed beneath the U.S.
planes to shoot at
them. The history of U.S. destroyers carried on the
Navy's official
website no longer contains any reference to a naval
engagement having
occurred on August 4.

The last two messages in this set (05/0438Z, 05/0627Z)
show the North
Vietnamese Swatow boats to have regrouped at Hon Me
island with a
couple of torpedo boats and to have received orders
for some action to
be carried out in the northern Gulf of Tonkin in the
afternoon of
August 5. By that time Captain Herrick's DeSoto Patrol
had cleared the
Gulf and was no longer a factor.

An equally plausible construction of the events
pictured in these
intercepts is that the North Vietnamese, in the face
of the 34-A
maritime raids and sudden appearance of a heavy U.S.
warship, ordered
their Swatow patrol boats to rendezvous at Hon Me with
surviving
torpedo boats in preparation for defensive action
against the U.S.
destroyers, by then gone. It is not probable that the
North
Vietnamese, who knew from official U.S. statements
that Captain
Herrick had been reinforced, would have sent their
Swatow boats, with
no armament capable of sinking a destroyer
(machineguns and light
cannon only, no torpedoes), against the strengthened
U.S. destroyer
force. The intercepts themselves confirm that the
torpedo boat T-333,
the only survivor of the August 2 battle, was not
ready to sail at the
critical moment on August 4, when Hanoi could have set
up a battle for
that day.

Conclusion

Among the most prophetic and disturbing statements in
the declassified
record are those by national security adviser McGeorge
Bundy, at the
White House staff meeting at 8 a.m. on August 5, 1964.
Bundy told the
staff, according to the memorandum for the record
drafted by military
aide William Y. Smith: "On the first attack, the
evidence would be
pretty good. On the second one the amount of evidence
we have today is
less than we had yesterday. This resulted primarily
from correlating
bits and pieces of information eliminating double
counting and
mistaken signals. This much seemed certain: There was
an attack. How
many PT boats were involved, how many torpedoes were
fired, etc. - all
this was still somewhat uncertain. This matter may be
of some
importance since Hanoi has denied making the second
attack." We now
know this denial was accurate and Washington's claims
were not, and
that senior officials knew of the "double counting and
mistaken
signals." But when new staffer Douglass Cater -
attending his first
morning meeting on August 5, 1964 - questioned the
need for a
Congressional resolution, "Bundy, in reply, jokingly
told him perhaps
the matter should not be thought through too far. For
his own part, he
welcomed the recent events as justification for a
resolution the
Administration had wanted for some time."

Change a few of the words in these quotes - perhaps
substitute
"weapons of mass destruction" for "PT boats" and
"torpedoes," and
"Baghdad" for "Hanoi" - and the parallels with today
become all too apt.

This new evidence permits us to view more accurately
the internal
deliberations of the Johnson administration.
Especially in combination
with LBJ's telephone conversations with McNamara,
recently made
available to the public with transcriptions, the
material clearly
shows Washington rushing to a judgment on events in
the Tonkin Gulf,
which it seized upon as evidence in support of its
predetermined
intention to escalate the conflict in Vietnam. Those
who questioned
the veracity of the Johnson administration's
description of the Gulf
of Tonkin incident at the time were right to do so.
The manipulation
of this international situation for the
administration's political
purpose of obtaining a congressional authorization for
the use of
force bears considerable similarity to the manner in
which the Bush
administration manipulated intelligence regarding the
possibility that
Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction to gain its
own legislative
approval for war against that country. (Note 16) In
both cases, truth
became the first casualty. In both cases, the
consequences far
outweighed anything anticipated by the presidents
involved.






---------------------------------
   YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS


     Visit your group "prezveepsenator" on the web.

     To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
  prezveepsenator-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

     Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo!
Terms of Service.


---------------------------------