SwiftVets.com

[Guest]

THE FOUNDATION

"Done...the seventeenth day of September, in the year of our LORD one thousand seven hundred and eighty seven." --Closing line of the U.S. Constitution.

_____----********O********----______

THE PATRIOT PERSPECTIVE

Top of the fold -- Pollaganda: The Fourth Estate and Public Opinion...

Thomas Jefferson complained in 1804, "During the course of administration, and in order to disturb it, the artillery of the press has been leveled against us, charged with whatsoever its licentiousness could devise or dare." Old Tom could not fathom the power of the "press" today.

Given the Leftmedia's domination of the mainstream media's primary outlets -- print and television -- it's remarkable that any political candidates to the right of the big three talkingheads, Brokaw, Jennings and Rather, or their ideological kin on the editorial boards of The Washington Post and The New York Times, ever makes it to Washington. If not for talk-radio, the Internet and a smattering of centrist cable news programs, conservative voices would all be subject to Leftmedia filtration.

Indeed, several studies to assess the political views of national reporters in the major press pools of Washington and New York find that those reporters overwhelmingly self-identify as "liberal" or "Democrat." A recent survey, in fact, determined that only eight percent of those reporters would vote for a Republican -- no surprise to objective media analysts.

The most obvious method that Leftmedia "journalists" employ to shape public opinion is bias; they inculcate the masses with Left-elite perspective by selecting what news to "report" and how to frame it. This sordid practice has been well documented for almost two decades by media-watchdog groups and an intrepid handful of veteran reporters -- those who ascribe to a standard of journalistic objectivity.

Of course, a variant of the bias method is the outright lie -- for example Dan Rather's recent promulgation of what are, in all likelihood, forged documents, in a brazen effort to help the Kerry campaign denigrate President George Bush's service with the Texas Air National Guard more than 30 years ago, and divert attention from Kerry's embellished service record and emerging evidence of his collaboration with communists in the early 1970s.

In recent years, as a result of greater Leftmedia scrutiny by content analysts, and consumer flight from mainstream media outlets to alternative news sources, the Leftmedia print and television outlets have begun to feign a more moderate and objective political posture. But let's be clear: This is merely an attempt to conceal an abject bias.

Perhaps the most significant and insidious method the Leftmedia utilizes to shape public opinion, especially in the six-month period leading up to presidential elections, is "media polling," a subtle scheme of circular propaganda we call "pollaganda." Indeed, you'll be hard pressed to find any front page or nightly news broadcast between now and 2 November that doesn't reference such polling. Of note, polls that support Democrat candidates are often above the fold in lead stories, while polls that are favorable to conservative candidates are below the fold and mentioned only in a negative or qualified context.

Why?

Polling, especially media polling, is most often nothing more than a well-crafted lie masquerading as news -- a lie intended to influence public opinion. In political cycles, media polls lead public opinion, particularly the opinion of those who are "undecided," rather than reflect public opinion and are, ultimately, self-fulfilling.

To explain better the process of polling as propaganda, consider three definitions from The Patriot's editorial-shop dictionary:

Pollaganda -- Outcome-based polling; instruments designed to generate a preferential outcome, which can be used to manipulate public opinion by advancing the perception that a particular issue or candidate has majority support.

Pollagandize -- To utilize instruments of pollaganda, or selective poll reporting (reporting mostly favorable polls), to advance a particular bias.

Pollaganda Cycle -- The intentional propagation of a particular bias by Leftmedia mainstream television and print outlets to manipulate public opinion by first saturating viewers with "reporting" that reflects a particular bias; second, conducting public opinion polls in concert with like-minded organizations or campaigns, which will reflect that bias; third, further proselytizing viewers by treating these poll results as "news"; and fourth, using pollaganda to induce "bandwagon psychology" (the human tendency of those who do not have a strong ideological foundation to aspire to the side perceived to be in the majority), thus driving public opinion toward the original media bias.

ABC's George Stephanopoulos, a key strategist in Bill Clinton's campaigns and one of many Leftists who have repeatedly passed through the looking glass between political camps and their news fronts, noted that political scientists "talk about the bandwagon effect, that once a candidate gets in the zone, all of the coverage is good, almost no matter what happens...."

Indeed, Leftmedia pollagandizing of the electorate is an intentional undermining of the democratic process. Pollaganda not only creates a targeted constituency; at the same time it can discourage voter turnout, turning the electoral process into a spectator sport.

This "bandwagon effect" accounts for The Patriot's policy never to cite political poll results, favorable or unfavorable, for conservative or liberal candidates.

Mind you, we're not suggesting that there is a deliberate intra-media conspiracy to drive public opinion. Nor are we suggesting that there are not objective and, thus, credible polls, but even the most objective polls are eventually adulterated by the effect of pollaganda.

Leftmedia bias is merely the consequence of the mass-media zeitgeist and culture, which are uniformly and profoundly liberal. Such liberalism has become so embedded within the collective consciousness of television talkingheads and print copy-writers that it flows freely from every broadcast and front page.

So how is it that conservative candidates for national office sometimes manage to receive favorable numbers in the only poll that really counts -- the one on Election Day? For the same reason that in January of 2001, three weeks before George Bush took his oath of office, Patriot No. 01-01 offered this analysis (amid the Left's contention that Albert Gore really won that election): "Mr. Bush [will] unify the nation around his character and agenda and win big in 2004. ... Mr. Bush will be doing much more than installing new administration faces after January 20th. He will be restoring a few things that have been painfully absent from the presidency for eight long years -- most notably, honor and common decency."

While we are not among the chattering class of political prognosticators, The Patriot's editorial staff stands by this assessment today. We do so not because we agree with all of the Bush administration's policies -- indeed, we have roundly criticized many of President Bush's domestic spending initiatives -- but, as we projected almost four years ago, George W. Bush has restored honor and decency to the White House. Further, he is an honorable and decent man -- a leader who has proven himself under the most difficult of circumstances while remaining humble.

Unlike his opponent, George Bush is plain-spoken, which is to say he does not speak in the Left-elite's Beltway dialect. But his plain-spoken manner, combined with his genuine decency and humility, resonates with the majority of Americans across all racial and socio-economic lines.

In other words, the majority of Americans are still good, God-fearing people who, most of the time, are able to break the Leftmedia's stranglehold on their political perspective and worldview.

_________________________________________________
Publisher's Note:

Today we commemorate the signing, 217 years ago, of our nation's Constitution, the operational implementation for our 1776 Declaration of Independence. On this Constitution Day, we pray for our nation, and especially those uniformed Patriots standing in harm's way around the world who have sworn to protect our Constitution with their lives.

From the Bush campaign journal...

The Bush campaign got some unexpected help this week from (drum roll please) Democrat National Committee Commissar of Propaganda Dan Rather. Last week, The Patriot reported that DNC chief Terry McAuliffe conspired with Rather, who moonlights as a See-BS talkinghead, to release "newfound" records disputing the official evaluations then-ANG fighter pilot Lt. George Bush received between 1970 and 1973 from Lt. Col. Jerry Killian (now conveniently deceased), his wing commander.

Unfortunately for McAuliffe and Rather, the records contain some peculiarities that none of the forensic experts we talked with last week can explain. As of this week, neither McAuliffe nor Rather has returned our calls with an explanation for these oddities.

We did hear back from CBS News President Andrew Heyward: "We established to our satisfaction that the memos were accurate or we would not have put them on television. There was a great deal of corroborating evidence from people in a position to know."

On Monday, Rather told CNN: "I know that this story is true. I believe that the witnesses and the documents are authentic. We wouldn't have gone to air if they would not have been (sic). There isn't going to be -- there's no -- what you're saying apology? I want to make clear to you, I want to make clear to you if I have not made clear to you, that this story is true..."

On Tuesday, Rather told the New York Observer, "If you can't deny the information, then attack and seek to destroy the credibility of the messenger, the bearer of the information. And in this case, it's change the subject from the truth of the information to the truth of the documents. This is your basic fogging machine, which is set up to cloud the issue, to obscure the truth."

By Wednesday, Rather was inhaling smoke from his own fogging machine, claiming that if the documents were forgeries, "I want to break the story." Really, folks, he actually said that. And then he went on to say that the authenticity of the documents didn't matter, only that what was in them was true. Really, he actually said that, too.

Why is Rather now virtually conceding that the documents are forgeries? Could be that Heyward sent a memo to Rather telling him that, according to the latest Neilsen ratings, CBS News viewership dropped in virtually every major media market except, of course, San Francisco. Indeed, the See-BS Evening "News" with Dan Rather is now pulling a smaller market share than reruns of "The Simpsons." D'oh!

By Thursday, Rather was refusing to release the name of his source, though it is likely that the documents were copied at a Kinko's shop in Abilene, Texas, near the home of one likely source, Bill Burkett, a man whose name does not appear on the roster of any of George W. Bush's fan clubs.

As of this writing, virtually all of CBS's "document experts" have refuted claims that they authenticated the documents, and every Leftmedia outlet other than CBS has concluded that the documents are forgeries. Former CBS correspondent Bernard Goldberg weighed in on Rather's pathetic charade: "This is what happens when a news organization operates in a bubble -- a comfy liberal-elite bubble. They wanted the story to be true, so they apparently minimized or ignored any information that contradicted their pre-conceived notions. This is the nature of bias in the news." Added Nicholas Lemann, dean of Columbia University's Graduate School of Journalism, "If it turns out CBS got this wrong, it's very damaging."

Gee, Nick -- ya think?

Quote of the week...

"What's critical is that the president of the United States speak clearly and consistently at this time of great threat in our world, and not change positions because of expediency or pressure. Our troops, our friends and allies, and our enemies must know where America stands and that America will stand firm. We cannot waver, we cannot waver because our enemies will not waver." --President George W. Bush, speaking to the National Guard Association

The BIG lie...

"He failed to tell you the truth. You deserve better. ... I believe you deserve a president who isn't going to gild that truth, or gild our national security with politics, who is not going to ignore his own intelligence, who isn't going to live in a different world of spin, who will give the American people the truth, not a fantasy world of spin." --John Kerry to the NGA the day after President Bush; Kerry was greeted with "polite applause"

From the JFK DEMO-lition derby...

For weeks, Democrats have claimed outrage at Vice President Cheney's hard-hitting criticism of John Kerry. His suggestion that were Kerry elected, the U.S. would return to a pre-9/11 status with the Islamofascists, i.e., unprepared and unprotected against terrorist strikes, drew heated condemnation. Such intemperate speech -- however truthful -- is apparently not acceptable in Democrat society. But if that's the case, someone must have forgotten to send that memo to the likes of Max Cleland, Barney Frank, Maxine Waters, Algore, Howard Dean, Al Sharpton, and Jesse Jackson -- among many others.

To Democrats' chagrin, Mr. Cheney has been using Mr. Kerry's own words against him, often quoting the senator in stump speeches. Referring to Kerry's appeal for a "more sensitive war," Cheney responded, "Those who threaten us and kill innocents around the world do not need to be treated more sensitively. They need to be destroyed." Cheney intoned a list of insensitive but victorious American warriors and suggested that "sensitivity" would be correctly read as weakness.

About Kerry's latest mantra, "the wrong war in the wrong place at the wrong time," Mr. Cheney claimed he'd heard that song before. He recalled how that very position had been put forth by Howard Dean early in the campaign, and that Mr. Kerry had himself criticized it. Cheney reminded his audience that Kerry had rebutted Dean, saying, "Those who doubted whether Iraq or the world would be better off without Saddam Hussein...don't have the judgment to be president or the credibility to be elected president."

Cheney further disparaged Kerry's record of absenteeism during most of the Senate Intelligence Committee's public hearings and his proposed cuts in intelligence spending. Team Kerry responds that at the end of the Cold War, most lawmakers were talking big defense cuts. But so far no note from home for the absences.

With his many years in the nation's capital, Cheney sees Kerry's continual position changing on the war as a first. "In all the national campaigns that I've watched up close, I've never seen a candidate go back and forth so many times on a single issue. His back-and-forth reflects a habit of indecision and sends a message of confusion." Kerry, Cheney later concluded, lacks "deeply held convictions about right and wrong."

DEMO-gogue campaign quotes...

Speaking Thursday with radio talk show host Don Imus, John Kerry muddied the waters more than even we thought possible, arguing that he now sees no reason the U.S. should have gone to war in Iraq, but stands by his Senate vote that authorized the war. "Not under the current circumstances, no, there are none that I see," said Kerry when asked about justification for the war. "I voted based on weapons of mass destruction. The president distorted that, and I've said that." (Did the UN, EU, British, French, and German intelligence and virtually every nation of the globe also "distort" that?) Then, flip-flopping almost in the same breath, Kerry added that it was appropriate to threaten Saddam to comply with UNSC resolutions and weapons inspection demands, and that he was "prepared to use the force."

"I think it was the right vote based on what Saddam Hussein had done, and I think it was the right thing to do to hold him accountable," Kerry said. "[My position] can't be clearer."

Really? Don Imus, a self-described Kerry supporter, must have thought otherwise. When Kerry hung up from the interview, Imus told his audience, "I asked him a number of questions about Iraq, and I can't tell you what he said."

The JFK Flip-Flop of the Week...

Flip: "We should increase funding [for the war in Iraq] by whatever number of billions of dollars it takes to win." --John F. Kerry, 31 August 2003

Flop: "$200 billion [for Iraq] that we're not investing in education and health care, and job creation here at home. ... That's the wrong choice." --JFK, 8 September 2004

This week's "Braying Jackass" award:

"Clothing is wonderful, but let them go naked for a while, at least the kids. Water is necessary, and then generators, and then food, and then clothes." --Maria Teresa Thierstein Simoes-Ferreira Heinz Kerry, ever helpful and equally modest, on how best to re-supply hurricane victims

Or let them eat Twinkies, eh, Maria?

News from the Swamp...

Thanks in part to the 100,000-plus Patriot readers who signed the petition, "Reject Renewal of Feinstein-Schumer Gun-Control Act," the so-called "assault weapons" ban, one of many Leftist initiatives for the incremental obfuscation of the Second Amendment, expired on Monday, much to the chagrin of its sponsors. At the time of its passage in 1994, Diane Feinstein said, "If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate...for an outright ban, picking up every one of them, Mr. and Mrs. America, turn them all in, I would have done it."

John Kerry was distraught: "And so for the first time in ten years, when a killer walks into a gun shop, when a terrorist goes to a gun show somewhere in America, when they want to purchase an AK-47 or some other military assault weapon, they're going to hear one word: Sure." On the other hand, Kerry had this to say in an interview last week: "My favorite gun is the M-16.... I don't own one of those now, but one of my reminders of my service is a Communist Chinese [AK-47] assault riffle."

In related news, based on ample research that shows legal gun ownership significantly reduces crime, particularly in "right to carry" states, Republicans have proposed an amendment to Washington, D.C.'s 2005 budget to repeal virtually all the Districts gun restrictions.

On the National Security front...

Rep. Porter Goss was in the hot seat on Tuesday before the Senate Intelligence Committee, answering questions about the state of affairs at the CIA. "On a scale of ten, we're about three in terms of build-back," Goss remarked. "The great bulk of what we need is more than five years out now."

As expected, the hearings were less contentious than they would have been in a non-election year. Although Democrats have plentiful ammunition to use against Goss, they are restrained by their own words since the release of the 9/11 Commission Report. Chief among those words would be their public demands that the Bush Administration move quickly to reform the intelligence agencies. Subjecting Goss to the usual confirmation-hearing treatment -- i.e., doing everything short of accusing him of eating kittens for fun -- would cast Democrats in the role of partisan obstructionists.

Instead, Goss was subjected to only a few pointed questions. Senator John Rockefeller cited a Goss article that was highly critical of John Kerry's record on intelligence funding. Rockefeller pointed out that the Clinton Administration proposed more funding than was actually provided by the Republican-controlled Congress in which Goss served. Goss's repeated non-answer -- "the record is the record" -- was hardly confidence-inspiring, and might have opened the door to a full-court press were it not for the aforementioned election-year considerations. The Patriot expects that Democrats will get a few points of objection on the record during Goss's hearings but will vote along with Republicans to confirm him to the CIA post.

On the Homeland Security front...

Meanwhile, legislation to give the soon-to-be-created National Intelligence Director full budget power has been introduced by Senate Republican Susan Collins and Senate Democrat Joe Lieberman. Under their plan, which is generally in line with what the President has in mind, some military intelligence, including the Defense Intelligence Agency, would still be maintained by the Defense Department. But the jury is still out on whether the new NID will have hiring and firing powers. President Bush supports it, but some senators are still hedging.

From the warfront with Jihadistan...

On Monday the International Atomic Energy Agency's Board of Governors convened in Vienna. At the top of their list for consideration is Iran's nuclear program and what steps to take to confirm her compliance with the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. U.S. delegates to the meeting have pushed for a 31 October deadline for Iran to prove itself in compliance, and an automatic "trigger" that would refer the case to the Security Council if Iran were found not to be so. The EU-3 -- France, Germany and the UK -- have resisted both the deadline and the "trigger," preferring the usual softer language that exemplifies the UN.

With a U.S. election taking place in November, and an Iranian "election" taking place in May, there is every likelihood that IAEA and the UN will kick this problem down the road yet again, perhaps as far as next summer. Mohamed ElBaradei, head of the IAEA, stated that he was "not convinced Iran's activities were entirely peaceful," but that there was no "firm evidence" of Iran's pursuing nuclear weapons.

If there is any lesson the world should have learned over the last decade -- both from North Korea's fait accompli nuclear buildup and from the 9/11 attacks -- it is that waiting for "firm evidence" is a luxury that cannot be afforded in the 21st century. Iran must -- MUST -- prove itself in compliance, and soon. Every passing day brings the mad mullahs closer to nuclear capability. We look for President Bush to maintain his position that, "A nuclear-armed Iran is not acceptable," and for the U.S. to keep pressure on the UN to hold Iran to its NPT obligations. Stay tuned'

Elsewhere on the global warfront with Jihadistan, reacting to the slaughter of the Beslan innocents and other acts of terror by Chechen separatists and their Jihadi brethren, Russian President Vladimir Putin proposed sweeping changes to the Russian government, some potentially helpful, some very worrisome. In a move to coordinate anti-terror activities better, Putin issued a decree that will centralize Russia's anti-terrorist efforts under a new agency. If it eliminates some Russian bureaucracy and helps to open communications between levels of government, such an agency could help Russia react more quickly and efficiently across its broad geography, as well as finally focus the Russian government's attention where it is sorely needed -- upon killing terrorists. However, Putin's other proposals appear to be little more than a power grab and should be viewed with concern. Included in these proposals are major changes to the Russian electoral system, including the elimination of direct popular elections for members of the Duma and for regional governors. Any weakening of the democratic process in Russia while attempting to leave its authoritarian history in the past should be of deep concern, as the U.S. State Department has stated publicly. Fortunately, Putin's proposals are meeting resistance from some Russian politicians, as well as from the Russian press. Perhaps true freedom is taking root in Russia after all.

And a bit of good news from the warfront: For the a real snapshot of America's role in a free Iraq, link to -- http://federalistpatriot.us/news/real_usa.asp (Note to our military readers in Iraq: If you have a photo you want posted on this page, send it to IraqPhotos@Federalist.com )

On cross-examination...

"It is a certain fact that not all Muslims are terrorists, but it is equally certain, and exceptionally painful, that almost all terrorists are Muslims." --Abdel Rahman al-Rashed, general manager of Al-Arabiya news channel, responding to recent Islamist terrorism in Russia, Iraq and across the Middle East

From the "Department of Military Readiness"...

Calling all Patriots! While more than 200,000 Shields of Strength have already been sent to military forces deployed overseas, The Patriot is receiving new requests from military chaplains in Iraq (primarily Army and Marine units) whose units have recently been deployed on rotation. If you're able to support Operation SoS and can help provide Shields of Strength to ground forces on the frontlines with Jihadistan, please link to http://federalist.com/news/sos.asp

Also, if you're among our military readership in Iraq and would like us to match your unit with a sponsor, please e-mail us at . (NOTE: 100% of the proceeds from these sales are applied to sponsor requests from military units. The Patriot is not compensated in any way for Operation Shield of Strength. We are donating our services and personnel to match sponsors and military units.)

Judicial Benchmarks...

The Supremes' Chief Justice, William Rehnquist, refused to rule on the Wisconsin Right to Life request to stay enforcement of McCain-Feingold, the so-called "Bipartisan Campaign Finance Reform Act," so that the group could air radio and TV ads mentioning (imagine that!) Russ Feingold. (As we've maintained all along, truth in labeling would require that McCain-Feingold be called "The Incumbent Protection Act.") Rehnquist demurred, on the basis that the organization had not proven its free speech rights were violated by the law. So much for the First Amendment!

In a related decision, U.S. District Judge James Robertson denied Campaign Bush attorney requests to force the Federal Election Commission to crack down on 527 groups, formed because of the McCain-Feingold law, to disseminate political information about candidates that other groups (see above) now cannot do. The Bush lawyers will appeal the ruling. Far be it from us to say "We told you so," but Mr. Bush should have exercised his veto on McCain-Feingold when he had the chance.

From the "Non Compos Mentis" Files...

Kitty Kelley has written another book -- and we couldn't care less. Indeed, we'd get a more penetrating investigation from Spy Kids.

The problem, however, is that many supposedly serious journalistic outlets have taken it seriously. That the Pravda headlines, "Laura Bush, she who is without sin" is no surprise. But others are not much better, giving credibility to tabloid trash. USA Today: "Critical Book on Bushes Sparks Firestorm." Huh? The Washington Post: "Media View Kitty Kelley's Bush Book With Caution." With caution? CBS can push forgeries on 60 Minutes, but this book gets a "caution?" The Chicago-Sun Times outrageously speculates: "Kelley's Book On Bush May Be Bunk." (NB: that article actually required two writers.)

The problem with books (and reviews) such as these is that even though we know them to be contemptibly ridiculous, they plant a seed in uneducated minds. For example, the book says that, "They [The Republican Party] found the perfect empty vessel in W. He'll go wherever the wind will go." Does anyone actually think Bush bows to public opinion? Certainly not an educated mind, right? Karl Rove as puppet master? Rubbish, to be sure, but it satisfies the liberal conspiracy-theory mentality, where there is always an ulterior motive, a sinister force. It allows their impressionable minions to say, "Sure, Kitty Kelley is an idiot, but she made some good points...."

At the book's website, if you click "Praise" [for the book], you get the following response: "Coming soon." Sure thing.

From the "Village Academic Curriculum" File...

Mike Adams, Associate Professor of Criminal Justice at UNC and an NRA member, wrote a letter to several universities' Women's Centers offering to lecture (for free) about the benefits and responsibilities of gun ownership in general and concealed-carry permits for women in particular. He pointed out that "the response to the problem of violence against...female students has lacked a diversity of viewpoint." The "response," shall we say, was underwhelming. Duke, Georgia Tech, Princeton, U. of Alabama, UMass at Amherst, Georgetown, and Emory were among those universities who did not respond. Duke was booked -- the Women's Revolutionary Knitting Forum was scheduled for September 1, 15, 29, October 13, 27, November 10, and December 8. Alabama had already scheduled "Faces in the Mirror" umpteen times. Princeton was also busy with "Athletics and Homophobia." NC State gave the only real response: "[We are] unable to offer a program on gun ownership at this time." They made a ludicrous reference to "statistics" showing that those attempting to defend themselves with guns ended up being killed by the gun. Yep, those malevolent handguns do have a tendency to turn on their owners.

Around the world...

"From our point of view, and from the [UN] charter point of view, it was illegal," UN Secretary General Kofi Annan intoned last weekend, speaking of the war with Iraq. Let's see -- Iraq had broken the ceasefire agreements that concluded the 1991's war, effectively re-establishing its combatant stance, defied a series of UNSC resolutions, but Annan believes the UN is still master of the only proper decision about resuming the war? Mind you, this is the same Kofi Annan who presided over the UN's utterly corrupt Oil-for-Food program -- a program that for years padded the pockets of Saddam and his UN and Eu-nik friends while depriving the Iraqi people of life's basic necessities.

Australia's Prime Minister John Howard, in a tight race for reelection where the focus of the debate is Iraq, scoffed, "That was a legal opinion we obtained from the relevant people in Australia. There had been a series of Security Council resolutions and the advice we had was that it was entirely legal."

And Texas Sen. John Cornyn added, "Kofi Annan, and those on the campaign trail who share this view, must explain the inconvenient fact that if they had their way, Saddam would still be in power, mass graves would still be growing in size, and tens of millions of newly liberated people would still be under the boot of a brutal dictator."

Secretary of State Powell added, simply, "I'm sure I will have the opportunity to talk to Kofi about this."

And last...

On 30 September, our petition calling for John Kerry's prosecution and disqualification from public office for "giving aid and comfort to the enemy" in time of war will be delivered to Senate President Richard Cheney, Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist and Attorney General John Ashcroft. Regardless of the outcome of the election in November, since John Kerry made his war record the centerpiece of his presidential campaign, we intend to make it the centerpiece of this call for his prosecution. Please join 160,000 fellow Patriots who have already signed the petition demanding John Kerry's prosecution. Link to -- http://www.PatriotPetitions.US/Kerry (If you don't have Web access, please send a blank e-mail to: Each e-mail sent to this address will be counted as one signature for the petition -- no duplicates are counted.)
_________________________________________________

Lex et Libertas -- Semper Vigilo, Paratus, et Fidelis! Mark Alexander, Publisher, for the editors and staff. (Please pray on this day, and every day, for our Patriot Armed Forces standing in harm's way around the world in defense of our liberty, and for the families awaiting their safe return.)

*Printer-friendly format
Link to -- http://FederalistPatriot.US/current2004a.asp