Encinitas, Dec 22, 2005

Self Realization Fellowship Ashram Center
Meditation Gardens
Established by Paramahansa Yogananda 1937


Sony DSC-F828 8.0mp

Sony DSC-F828 8.0mp

Sony DSC-F828 8.0mp

Sony DSC-F828 8.0mp

Sony DSC-F828 8.0mp

Sony DSC-F828 8.0mp

How Do I Get a Job Like That?

Big pharma CEOs are the highest paid CEOs.

How hard is this for you to grasp—giant pharmaceutical companies make billions in revenue and profits by selling patent-protected drugs to millions of Americans and millions more overseas. If one of these drugs turns out to be harmful--even after some testing prior to hitting the market that shows the drug will do what it is supposed to without harmful side-effects—then the drug manufacturer can be liable in court claims by the consumer, just like any other item sold, from cars to microwave ovens to childrens’ clothing.

One of the most powerful elected representatives in the nation—elected to uphold the public trust and represent its interest in an oath of office taken upon being elected—Senator Bill Frist of Tennessee, a former physician, has added a provision to a military spending bill, releasing from any sort of legal liability, a drug maker whose product causes bodily harm to an individual, under certain circumstances.

Forget about the product being a drug—wouldn’t a car manufacturer be thrilled to know that if the car they made was somehow defective and blew up under certain conditions, that the car-maker was protected from being sued for negligence or otherwise?

Do you think the huge financial resources of the pharmaceutical lobby in Washington, D.C. would be able to get the appropriate amount of money into the pockets of powerful legislators like Bill Frist so that he would take that liability ball and run with it in order to pay back his benefactors? Are we clear on this?

Frist is sleazing into this appropriations bill an item that gives drug makers freedom from lability while they make billions of dollars on their products:

Companies making vaccines to protect against biological agents or pandemic viruses would be shielded from lawsuits, even if they are negligent or reckless, under a provision inserted into a military spending bill by Senator Bill Frist of Tennessee, the majority leader…

…But critics, like Senator Edward M. Kennedy, Democrat of Massachusetts, said the language was more far-reaching than Mr. Frist had described.

"The Republican leadership in Congress cut a back room deal to give a massive Christmas bonus to the drug companies," Mr. Kennedy said in a statement…

…The provision would provide immunity from lawsuits to any company that made "countermeasures" - broadly defined as drugs, vaccines or medical devices - to protect Americans against pandemics, epidemics or biological attacks. It would give the secretary of health and human services authority to determine what constituted a pandemic or an epidemic. Critics said that authority, broadly construed, could apply to heart drugs or diabetes, for example, should the secretary declare heart disease or diabetes an epidemic.-- Legal Shield for Vaccine Makers Is Inserted Into Military Bill, NY Times, 12/19/05

Frist is not the enemy, or the problem—our apathy and ignorance is. Nothing is new about this escapade and charade. Just let’s not be asleep while we’re being fucked.

Bush Thinks He’s as Good as Lincoln, But He’s Better Than Nixon

As the Civil War started, in the very beginning of Lincoln's presidential term, a group of "Peace Democrats" proposed a peaceful resolution to the developing Civil War by offering a truce with the South, and forming a constitutional convention to amend the U.S. Constitution to protect States' rights. The proposal was ignored by the Unionists of the North and not taken seriously by the South. However, the Peace Democrats, also called copperheads by their enemies, publicly criticized Lincoln's belief that violating the U.S. Constitution was required to save it as a whole. With Congress not in session until July, Lincoln assumed all powers not delegated in the Constitution, including the power to suspend habeas corpus. In 1861, Lincoln had already suspended civil law in territories where resistance to the North's military power would be dangerous. In 1862, when copperhead democrats began criticizing Lincoln's violation of the Constitution, Lincoln suspended habeas corpus throughout the nation and had many copperhead democrats arrested under military authority because he felt that the State Courts in the north west would not convict war protesters such as the copperheads. He proclaimed that all persons who discouraged enlistments or engaged in disloyal practices would come under Martial Law.--http://www.civil-liberties.com/pages/did_lincoln.htm

The South was lobbing shells at the White House in 1862. In 2005 the US military occupies Iraq almost exactly half-way around the world. President George W. has repeatedly authorized unwarranted wiretap surveillance within the United States, an admission of illegal activity that may be an impeachable violation of the oath of office and the Constitution.

President Bush defended Monday a secretive program that eavesdrops on some international phone calls involving U.S. citizens, saying the United States must be "quick to detect and prevent" possible near-term terrorist attacks.—CNN, 12/19/05

President Bush came out swinging on Snoopgate—he made it seem as if those who didn’t agree with him wanted to leave us vulnerable to Al Qaeda—but it will not work. We’re seeing clearly now that Bush thought 9/11 gave him license to act like a dictator, or in his own mind, no doubt, like Abraham Lincoln during the Civil War.--Jonathan Alter Newsweek, 12/19/05

President Richard Nixon, in 1971, made the same argument as President George W. Bush makes today to justify domestic spying without the need for judicial approval…

…A unanimous Supreme Court (the vote was 8-0, with Justice Rehnquist recusing himself because he was in the Justice Department legal counsel's office when the domestic spying program was formulated), with Justice Powell writing the opinion, in United States v. U.S. District Court, unambiguously rejected any such notion, articulating a clear-cut admonition to those who would diminish the import of the Fourth Amendment by suggesting that domestic spying at the whim of the president would be permitted under any circumstances…

…What is really happening is that the Bush Administration is seeking this moment to reverse the Nixon case and gather unto itself an unrestricted and unreviewable right to engage in domestic spying.--Martin Garbus, Nixon Loses, Bush Wins, HuffingtonPost.com, 12/19/05

The question is, where is the House Judiciary Committee, and the would-be ensuing impeachment hearings regarding the many possible Bush offenses against his oath of office and the Constitution?

It took a while, but by the time things were this bad off under Nixon, the House Judiciary Committee hearings were revved well up. So far, the democratic leadership (if there is one?) needs to come out of “stand-by” mode and do its mandated duty—call to account the law-breakers who admit their wrongdoing as if throwing down a glove for a duel.

As I’ve noted in this blog, there would come a time when the ultimate skeleton key would pop out, and bring Bush and his bunch down—admitting to a federal crime, such as repeatedly approving illegal domestic bugging in blatant violation of protected 4th-Amendment rights—this is it. Bring the hearings on.

Citizens of the World Unite!

How many times will I have to write on this blog about the benefit of immigrants to the economy and general welfare of our country? In a typical mutually positive email exchange with Carolyn Kaye of Makethemaccountable.com, I pointed out that there is evidence of benefits from immigration that is being presented to the state of California. Carolyn’s reaction was practical if not resigned:

This country was built on immigration. We owe all of our energy and
maverick spirit to immigration. But my skeptical side (which is gigantic) has to ask: When have facts ever been allowed to overcome emotion?

That’s a tough argument, and from the friendly side. Here are some facts, and ideas, from a column in the Los Angeles Times:

…by deflating numerous myths about illegal immigration it [report prepared by the Center for the Continuing Study of the California Economy] underscores the genuine issues and points us toward the best policies to address them. Chief among its findings is this: Immigration, legal or illegal, while imposing net fiscal costs on this state, produces a net economic benefit for the country.-- MICHAEL HILTZIK / GOLDEN STATE, Los Angeles Times, 12/15/05

You’ll really have to read the entire article for the inside “emmes.” Rest assured, whatever prejudices you had about “illegal immigration” prior to reading this article, you will have to think about again, in order to justify your convictions with the facts. Our relatives, friends, and neighbors, who are fearful of the incoming tide of immigrants to this country, legal or documented, are not well informed about reality. And the demagogue politicians who would try to scare us into thinking that terrorists and criminals are flooding through our borders are also misinformed.

The fact is simple: we are a nation of immigrants, that is where the strength of America lies, and we must embrace this strength for our future, because that is reality. We must adopt programs to organize this influx of immigrants, rather than opposing it as if it were a problem.

Get a grip, as the world becomes smaller.

Childrens' Park, Laguna Niguel, Dec 14, 2005

Casio Exilim 2.0 mp 

Laguna Niguel, Dec 14, 2005

Casio Exilim 2.0 mp 

San Juan Capistrano, Dec 14, 2005

Casio Exilim 2.0 mp 

How to Play Bridge

"We were trying to avoid information overload, which I don't think serves people well either."-- California's deputy director of medical care services, Stan Rosenstein, on why a state plan to finance drug benefits for disabled seniors was not publicized more vigorously. Los Angeles Times, 12/12/05

No one wants “information overload,” so we can be thankful that Merck withheld information in a 2000 study that Vioxx caused more heart attacks than was being reported. These drug companies and the government officials they help keep in power don’t want us to clutter our brains with extraneous details. They are looking out for our welfare, don’t you know.

Nearly 1 million poor and frail California seniors who will be transferred automatically into the Medicare prescription program Jan. 1 can get transitional help from the state if private insurers under the new plan do not cover their particular medications.

But no one has notified those eligible of the state's policy — which provides up to a 100-day supply of medicines they are currently taking, including expensive name brands — and they only have until Dec. 31 to request and receive the medication.--Los Angeles Times, 12/12/05

There is some suggestion that in the zeal of Governor Arnold’s budget tightening efforts, there was a hope that the needy seniors would avoid dipping into this $100 million well and thus deplete California’s coffers just when things were starting to look a little better for the treasury. If an elderly person can’t make up his or her mind where to get cheap drugs, why should regular taxpaying citizens foot the bill for them to get their prescriptions in the interim. Everyone’s got to pull their own weight, like Bill O’Reilly pummels his listeners every day. Otherwise we’re nothing but a bunch of pinko commies bleeding the till needlessly.

Or, someone forgot to push the PR buttons hard enough and seniors just haven’t gotten the word. Until today’s front page numero uno story addressing the issue of this 100 day state-paid-for drug bridge for seniors.

Stan Rosenstein’s going to be old one day. I wonder if he’ll be able to stand up to the “information overload” he’ll probably demand then.

Senator McCarthy died today.

I was a senior in high school when he tried to win the democratic nomination for President of the United States. Lyndon Johnson was about to run for a second term, and he was pretty much commanding the Vietnam War like Bush is today. Only at that time, there were 3 times as many troops in Vietnam as are in Iraq now, and hundreds of GI’s were being killed every month. The economy was in great shape and other than this huge problem of war in Southeast Asia, which Americans didn’t understand at all, things were going well for America.

McCarthy was the champion of those of us who saw the Vietnam debacle as a mistake and as a disaster. As the senator from Minnesota got his word out, his followers became multitudes. Johnny Carson had politicians on his show periodically, and Gene McCarthy was making enough noise that he earned a venue on that late night staple of the day, “The Tonight Show.”

My dad’s stepfather’s brother (following so far?) was the head of Sherry-Lehman Wines in New York, Sam Aaron. I never knew the guy, but Charlie, my dad’s stepdad, always said if I ever needed tickets for the Tonight Show in New York, Sam would get them for me. Today, if you want tickets to see Jay Leno in Burbank on the “Tonight Show,” you write a few weeks in advance and you wait in line all afternoon and you get in—my family has done that.

In the 1960’s, a ticket to Johnny Carson’s show was not to be had—you had to write in a year or more in advance, and waiting in line at Rockefeller Center to go to the 61st floor studio in a crowded elevator…for free, you get what you get.

I found out that Eugene McCarthy was going to be on the “Tonight Show with Johnny Carson” in a week, so I called Charlie, who called Sam, and I got my 2 seats and drove to Manhattan from Hartford—3 hours in traffic—and saw my anti-Vietnam War hero tell his tale. For those of us willing to stay up past 11:30 at night, they would see the tape of the show on TV.

He’s still my hero. When Bobby Kennedy finally hitched his campaign wagon to the anti-Vietnam War movement because the handwriting was on the wall, and McCarthy was already embarrassing the hell out of Johnson, the incumbent, McCarthy wouldn’t give in and bow to Kennedy’s campaign. He should have, for the sake of the cause, but he had worked so hard and so long to get out his message, and Kennedy was co-opting that message with his celebrity-candidacy, and McCarthy’s ego wouldn’t cave. Well, no-one’s perfect.

The memories of McCarthy and his campaign seem like yesterday to me. His passing reminds us of his great work, and how much it applies to the events of our time right now.

Catalina Sunset After Rain

 

Wolfowitz in Sheep’s Clothing

Wolfowitz Says Iraq War Might Not Have Occurred if United States knew Hussein Had No WMD—NuclearthreatInitiative.org12/8/05

That’s not exactly what the article associated with the headline says:

“I'm not sure based on the evidence we know now that we could have been absolutely convinced that there was no danger, absolutely no danger,” Wolfowitz, a chief promoter of the invasion who is now president of the World Bank, said at the National Press Club. “If somebody could have given you a Lloyd’s of London guarantee that weapons of mass destruction would not possibly be used, one would have contemplated much more support for internal Iraqi opposition and not having the United States take the job on the way we did.”NTI

“Internal Iraqi opposition.” I am not a third-grader. My daughter is in the third grade and she is quite willing in her innocence to grant a liar some leeway. I am not.

Wolfowitz is now head of the World Bank; he was one of the notorious neocons who masterminded the Iraq invasion scenario from day one.

From 1989 to 1993, Dr. Wolfowitz served as Under Secretary of Defense for Policy in charge of the 700-person defense policy team that was responsible to Secretary Dick Cheney for matters concerning strategy, plans, and policy. During this period Secretary Wolfowitz and his staff had major responsibilities for the reshaping of strategy and force posture at the end of the Cold War. Under his leadership, the Policy Staff played a major role in reviewing war plans for the Gulf War, and developing and executing plans that successfully raised more than $50 billion in Allied financial support for the war and prevented Iraq from opening a second front with Israel.—White House web site

The loyal support (for Bush policy) of an old friend (Wolfowitz) speaking out on behalf of “cooler heads” (hindsight) is the impetus behind Wolfowitz’s chicken shit remarks about “yes WMD or no WMD.” In fact, the vengeance and recrimination of the neocons against their old anti-Iran ally Sadam-turned-renegade is what the Iraq business has been all about from the end of the Gulf War to the Iraq campaign. The smart press knows it, the politicians in DC know it, and only the American public doesn’t have a clue because they don’t have time to follow to nuances while they’re trying to make ends meet all day long. The Bush guys depend on this apathy to maintain power.

Why don’t we all wise up and call these guys what they are—greedy wanton criminals. It works on the corporate raiders, like Adelphia and Enron--why not on our corrupt elected officials?

Terrorists Get Funding Through Bush Errors

WASHINGTON - The former Sept. 11 commission gave dismal grades Monday to the federal government's efforts to shore up national security and prevent another terror attack on the United States.—AP,MSNBC, 12/05/05

Once again it is clear our government, under the inept leadership of George W. Bush, has put all of its priorities in the wrong order. The mega-fortune funneled into the Iraq campaign, and away from fighting terrorists on the international level, has put every American, if not everyone in the world, in further jeopardy of a terrorist attack.

These groups of cells, who recruit in nations around the globe, who organize for the sake of causing mayhem and chaos to innocents, need a flow of funding to keep the engine running. This monetary stream is coming increasingly from internet scams that are bringing in untold amounts of cash.

No country is immune from cybercrime, which includes corporate espionage, child pornography, stock manipulation, extortion and piracy, said Valerie McNiven, who advises the U.S. Treasury on cybercrime.

"Last year was the first year that proceeds from cybercrime were greater than proceeds from the sale of illegal drugs, and that was, I believe, over $105 billion," McNiven told Reuters.

"Cybercrime is moving at such a high speed that law enforcement cannot catch up with it."

…Asked if there was evidence of links between the funding of terrorism and cybercrime, McNiven said: "There is evidence of links between them. But what's more important is our refusal or failure to create secure systems, we can do it but it's an issue of costs."—Reuters, Yahoo, 11/28/05

“…An issue of costs.” Well there it is, right in your face: Jeff Levy quoted this story on his radio show about computers and added an anecdote about the following phishing caper. “Phishing” is the attempt by an on line criminal to trick the unsuspecting surfer into thinking the personal information being requested is coming from a legitimate source, such as an individual’s bank or credit card company. A new scam came about last week involving the IRS—phony IRS web site, that is—emailing individuals that they were due a refund but that they had to provide their banking information. This may sound like an easy hoax to spot, but when the web user is faced with a legitimate-looking web site, which may actually be an exact version of the IRS web site only with the capability of re-directing the inputted information to an off-shore computer, that web user may succumb to the scam.

In fact, thousands of people have readily plugged in their social security numbers upon request to what they thought was their bank or any institution they do business with, and the information went directly to foreign sources who then can access that person’s bank account and withdraw money before being detected. Now it is becoming obvious that some of the $105 billion in cyber stealing is helping to fund the terrorist agenda.

The American taxpayer should know that US money is going to waste, fighting a non-existent war on terror in some places in the world, while in others, including right here at home in the IRS, the capability is there to stop terrorists from undetected stealing, but the Bush administration doesn’t know enough to spend the money to make the effort.

The 9/11 Commission came to the right conclusion in giving failing grades to the Bush government effort to quell terrorism, but even they might not know how right they were.

No Vaccine for AIDS

…World AIDS Day was marked around the globe Thursday.

About 40 million people worldwide are now infected with HIV, the virus that causes AIDS. About 3 million of them are expected to die of AIDS this year.—CNN 12/1/05

Over ten years ago one of the brightest immunologists on the planet told me there would never be a vaccine for AIDS. I’m no fan of vaccines for many reasons, not the least of which is that they cause untold physical damage despite whatever help they may offer. However, I was intrigued by this learned person’s blanket statement, since he was in the business of research into the human immune system, and vaccines were a part of his study.

He made it very simple for my lay understanding of immunity, germs, and AIDS. Acquired immune deficiency syndrome—AIDS—is the breakdown of the immune system’s ability to produce the various factors for antibodies which fight germs that humans are exposed to, serious and common, lethal and annoying, every day all our lives. This “deficiency” opens the body to sickness, complications, and ultimately, death.

Vaccines introduce toxins into the human immune system, usually in an altered form from the original germ so as not to cause the illness, in order to “trick” the system into producing the appropriate antibodies to fight the real germ if ever exposed to it. That’s the theory at least. The immunologist explained to me that since AIDS is the lack of immunity, a vaccine to mimic the mechanism that caused that lack would be almost the logical opposite of what a vaccine is supposed to do, which definitely is not to cause a lack of immunity. The assumption that HIV virus is the cause of AIDS is also not so straightforward, he explained. Therefore, developing a vaccine to protect against getting the HIV virus would not necessarily work in a one-to-one causal reaction.

My next question was what could be done on a general health care level to protect against the complications of AIDS if there could be no vaccine, and as yet there is no cure? He said there would be developments through the years that would reduce the effect of having AIDS on the system that would make the individual virtually “cured,” if not actually free from the disease itself. He said it would be like having a cancer that was in total remission. But he insisted there probably would be no cure, and certainly no vaccine, for AIDS. His remission scenario carried great hope in that light.

Now when I see the media hyping progress towards an AIDS vaccine, I wonder who gets the positive benefit from this kind of empty PR. Pharmaceutical companies looking for grants—half of their R & D money comes from government grants—could get a boost from the notion of a lead to a vaccine for AIDS. And it gives the press something to talk about.

The development of ways to diminish the effects of AIDS is a more likely road to helping millions of people afflicted by this grave disease, based on my immunologist-friend’s discussion. That methodology doesn’t sell newspapers, and it doesn’t boost the bottom line of big pharma.

But it’s the truth.

Common Sense on Immigration

Officials in both major parties continue to be paralyzed by political
correctness and bureaucratic sclerosis. They have yet to come to grips with the reality of homicidal America-haters lurking at our doorstep--evildoers whose modus operandi is to infiltrate our country, then kill us.—Gilchrist for Congress

...most economists concur that immigration has reduced the wages of
native workers with relatively little education and few skills. But for the remainder of the U.S. workforce, the impact has not been significant…

From an economic standpoint, the evidence seems clear that draconian measures such as massive deportations or major reductions in legal immigration levels would be counterproductive to the United States and its citizens.—Immigration, Jobs, and the American Economy Greg Anrig, Jr., Tova Andrea Wang, The Century Foundation, 9/29/2004

Immigrants pay on average $3000 each to smugglers. Why not have the immigrants pay America the $3000 and create a system under which we can monitor who is coming into the country and what they are doing? I propose that the government establish ICE centers at the borders. Those wishing to enter the country will pay the $3000 to ICE (US Immigration, Customs and Enforcement Agency). ICE will take the immigrant's photograph, fingerprints, and administer tuberculosis and other health tests. The immigrants must tell us where they are going to live and where they plan on working. With that information, and the payment, the immigrant can enter the country.—Steve Young for Congress

President George W. Bush appointed Christopher Cox, now former Republican congressman from the 48th district in Orange County, California, to head the Securities and Exchange Commission. The congressional vacancy Cox left required a special congressional election, which was held November 8, and the top-voted candidates now are up for the grand finale election on December 6, 2005.

The 48th district is well known throughout the country as a notoriously “red” hold out in an otherwise predominantly “blue” state. The sparse liberals in the district are surrounded by the decidedly conservative and even reactionary crowd, who love George W. no matter what he does or says, and fear Latino immigrants even while employing them by the hoards.

Fear will getcha. It is the emblem of demagogues. It was Hitler’s rocket fuel. Stupidity is forgivable. Ignorance is correctable. Willful ignorance is the downfall of us all.

Gilchrist and his flock sitting on the border with their binocs, vigilantes accomplishing nothing but gaining press coverage—do they think these people, these human beings coming in droves from south of the US/Mexican border, are a big, unified, criminal-terrorist mob? Do they think they are less worthy of the rights of man guaranteed by the US Constitution than native-born citizens by virtue of a border line drawn on a map? Do they think these people who were not born in the United States of America, and are not citizens of this great nation, are not capable of living up to the standards of US citizenship? Do Gilchrist and his followers think about anything but hatred, and vengeance, and fear?

And what’s with Steve Young? He knows he can’t win in the 48th district, with its mindset on Republican red, and Bush, and protection from evil, and NIMBY? What’s his effort worth? I think I know. I remember when Joe Duffy ran as the anti-Vietnam War candidate from Connecticut for US Senate in 1970. Tom Dodd, a friend of my family’s, was the incumbent Democrat and he was pro-war, behind Nixon. This was anomalous to anyone with a conscience at that time, similar to what is starting to happen now with the anti-Iraq War tide.

They still told us (“they” were the establishment, and “us” were the haphazard liberal anti-War crowd) we were pushing against a stone wall. Duffy ran on the motto that one man can make a difference. He miraculously defeated Dodd in the Democratic senatorial primary. The anti-war movement indeed was viable and alive.

Then Duffy ran against Republican Lowell Weicker, and Dodd as the Independent candidate—Weicker won when Dodd split the Democratic vote. This worked out well, it turns out, because the moderate and strong voice of Weicker on the House Judiciary Committee was instrumental in bringing down Nixon and his corrupt paranoid presidency.

So Steve Young’s intelligent voice, in the midst of the din of fear and ignorance, can make a difference. The solution he has outlined is a giant leap ahead of the indifference and confusion present in federal guidelines for immigration.

Immigration policies in the United States are contradictory and often confusing, alternately welcoming illegal immigrants to the country and telling them to go away…

"What we have now is a dishonest immigration policy," said Mark Krikorian, who runs the conservative Center for Immigration Studies in Washington, D.C. "We make it tough to get across the border but easy to get a job. This is really the central conflict. Everything stems from that."

…Much of the nation's wavering on illegal immigration stems from a lack of national direction, say academics and other experts.— Policies on Illegal Immigrants at Odds,By Anna Gorman and Jennifer Delson,Los Angeles Times, 11/27/05

8 to 10 million undocumented immigrants live in the United States, and they are not going back home. This issue has solutions which Steve Young and others can imagine and articulate. They need the help of caring, compassionate, tolerant fellow citizens, not gun-toting Texas Ranger wannabes stalking the border in the name of justice and freedom—they only represent tyranny and endless struggle.

Steve Young may not be the next congressman from the 48th district, but his voice of reason just won’t go away.

Looking back 3 Times When Kennedy Died

42 Years ago I was in the school gym locker room ready to go out for junior high school soccer practice. In the musty confines of the staid old country prep school, it seemed like all the rooms echoed with bad acoustics and ghosts of students from passed eras—pre World War II with the same traditions, good and not so good.

I was rushing to my locker when an upper-class friend ran by me and shouted “The president’s been shot.” I asked him what he meant by shot, and he said the news was that Kennedy was shot in Dallas. I didn’t even know he was going to Dallas, as if the itinerary of the President of the United States on any given day was of note to me.

Out on the soccer field, one of the teachers had placed a radio on the sidelines, so we could hear the latest news about a president being shot. It was a brisk fall afternoon and we were kicking the ball around not thinking about current events. Suddenly one of the kids yelled, “The president is dead.”

I remember where I was, and what I was doing, just like everyone remembers where they were when they heard about Pearl Harbor, or 9/11, or November 22. But I don’t remember anything of that day after that announcement.

As an undergraduate student in the late 1960’s at Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore, I was in a political science class taught by Dr. Peabody. Robert Peabody had published a scholarly tract on the campaign and election of Congressman Gerald Ford of Michigan, for minority leadership of the House of Representatives. Ford’s dream goal was to be Speaker of the House of Representatives, but the democrats were the majority party so Ford could only be minority leader.

Members of the US Congress actually have to run elections within their peer group in order to be the head of their party in the House and Senate, after they just ran to be elected from their district. Seems like there’s little time left to accomplish anything in the job they for which they were elected.

Dr. Peabody had befriended Mr. Ford when he wrote about him, so as a special part of our course, we students were taken on a field trip 45 miles down I-95 to Washington, D.C. to the office of the minority leader of the House of Representatives of the United States, in order to meet the Honorable Gerald Ford, Republican from Michigan. In our intimate gathering in Mr. Ford’s sumptuous office, we asked several questions, germane and otherwise, to the course we were taking. I was mostly interested in the huge set of volumes on the overly-impressive bookshelf, titled “Warren Commission.” This was the group set up by President Johnson, under the direction of former Chief Justice Earl Warren, to accumulate evidence and come to a conclusion regarding the facts surrounding the murder of John F. Kennedy on November 22, 1963. Mr. Ford was a member of that commission.

I had read several accounts of the probability of a conspiracy of various elements to kill JFK, and that Lee Harvey Oswald was just a patsy and may not even have shot at Kennedy. These were the 1960’s, and not a timid time for students to hold back on questioning authority. So I asked Mr. Ford, point blank, what he thought of the Warren Commission, of which he was a part, and of its finding that Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone in killing Kennedy, despite so much evidence of a conspiracy.

Mr. Ford’s simple and direct answer was that he was extremely proud of the work he and his partners did on the commission, and absolutely he stood by its conclusion. I really got nothing out of that, except how cool guys like Ford could be about answering any question, especially from a pinhead college kid.

Couple of years went by, and I was working on putting together some sort of documentary film project for my post graduate thesis at Boston University, tying in Watergate and Nixon’s shenanigans going back to the 1940’s, and up to the present in 1973. One friend who knew I was working on this attended a lecture given by the author Mark Lane, who had written Rush to Judgment in the 1960’s about the JFK murder conspiracy. My friend called my on a pay phone and said there were some things about Lane’s lecture that might be able to be used in the treatment about Nixon and Watergate. I no sooner said, “like what?” and Lane was on the phone spouting facts and issues to me in a studied and enthusiastic voice. I was thrilled—Mark Lane wanted to talk to me.

So much for my JFK remembrance stories. I wrote the thesis about Alger Hiss and how the use of bugging and other government improprieties helped corner him, just as covering up for these tricks helped Nixon get pushed out of the presidency.

What does this mean today, 42 years after the last assassination of a US president? What do we know now that we didn’t know then? Certainly the conspiracy theories are still in the forefront of the American imagination, while in that hunt for justice, nothing has gone further than Lee Harvey Oswald as the lone killer.

When Nixon appointed Ford Vice president, after Agnew resigned because he was indicted on kickback schemes while Governor of Maryland, was there a quid pro quo that Ford would pardon Nixon if Nixon was convicted of crimes related to Watergate? Ford pardoned Nixon the minute Nixon resigned, saying he wanted to spare the country of a lengthy trials etc. I didn’t believe that it wasn’t a cooked up deal and wrote my first telegram to a US president saying simply “I condemn your decision to pardon Nixon.” It was my firm belief that a trial would have brought forth the truth of the web and interweaving of who was involved in the money gathering and laundering, lest it continue without punishment.

Does any of this relate to our times, of post 9/11, Iraq involvement, international terrorism, misdirected priorities?

The current Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld, was first sworn in to that job on November 20, 1975, under President Ford, and was in that post for 14 months. Until President George W. Bush put him in there again, where he still is.

Vice President Dick Cheney was appointed Chief of Staff for President Ford in 1975. Then George H. W. Bush made Cheney his Secretary of Defense.

Talk about bad acoustics and old echoes!

ps: Did you know Nixon was in Dallas on November 22, 1963? I’ve never known if that was important or just a coincidence.