From: owner-roc-digest@lists.xmission.com (roc-digest) To: roc-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: roc-digest V2 #64 Reply-To: roc-digest Sender: owner-roc-digest@lists.xmission.com Errors-To: owner-roc-digest@lists.xmission.com Precedence: bulk roc-digest Thursday, February 5 1998 Volume 02 : Number 064 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 5 Feb 1998 11:00:28 -0600 (CST) From: Subject: NRA: "Our purpose is to get rid of" (firearms) (fwd) - ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Thu, 5 Feb 1998 11:29:33 -0500 (EST) From: Carl Reimann To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: L&J: NRA: "Our purpose is to get rid of" (firearms) (fwd) More opinion on NRA? Carl - ---Forwarded Msg--- Thu, 05 Feb 1998 10:04:37 -0400 (EDT), Patricia Neill : Fwd from the Kemp list ... NRA: "Our purpose is to get rid of them" (high capacity semi-automatic rifles) by ORAL DECKARD The Vigo Examiner I just got off the phone with the NRA (The Powerful gun Lobby.) I was told repeatedly that "Our purpose is to get rid of them" (high capacity semi-automatic rifles). Usually I get calls from The Citizens' Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms. And every time they call I ask them "What does the Second Amendment say?" And every time, without fail, they are taken by surprise, and stammer out bits of it, and fail. When pressed, they say something along the lines of "Well, I can't recite it word for word." And I always reply, "Why not? It's really not very long. And this is your job. You want me to give you money to defend the Second Amendment, and you don't even know what it says?" Sometimes they hang up on me at that point, and sometimes they continue trying to save face. Then there are some that aren't even embarrassed. This one started as a routine phone solicitation. But as usual I decided to have a little fun with the poor fellow. He told me that my NRA membership had lapsed, and that he would just reinstate it. I replied "No, I support the Second Amendment." There was a long pause. Then he began again to sign me up again. So I clarified. "I dropped out of the NRA because I support the Second Amendment and the NRA does not. I prefer the Gun Owners of America (goaslad@aol.com) and the Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership. (Against- Genocide@JPFO.org) He asked "Are you aware that Charlton Heston has taken control of the NRA?" Now it was getting serious. I answered "Yes, and he went on TV and announced that there was no need for anyone to own an AK-47." I thought I was being clear, but obviously not clear enough, as he took that as a good thing. So I asked "What does the Second Amendment say." He replied "The right to keep guns and stuff. I don't know it word for word." So I simply told him what it says: "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed." I then asked him what that meant. He said that when the Second Amendment was first drafted it was necessary to hunt for food. But now we could buy instant food. A few months ago I got a call from an NRA solicitor trying to get my wife signed back up. The next day when I reported that he had said no one needed high capacity semi-automatic rifles I was challenged to identify him. Unfortunately I had failed to get his name. But not this time. So I asked for his name, and was told "Richard Kuhlman." He even spelled it for me. I asked "OK, this is the evening shift of February 4th, where are you calling from." He answered "Wichita Kansas." As a double check, just to make sure I wasn't misunderstanding, I asked "Is there any need to protect assault high capacity semi-automatic rifles?" He answered "We would like to keep them for matches and things, but they don't have to have those big magazines, and only if they were used just for that purpose. We want to be reasonable." I then asked if I could speak to his supervisor. His supervisor was Mario. Just to be sure there was no misunderstanding, I introduced myself as a reporter for the Vigo Examiner, explained Richard Kuhlman and myself were just discussing the need to protect high capacity semi-automatic rifles, and asked "What's your take on it?" He asked "You want my opinion, or the NRA's opinion?" I answered "Both." So he explained that all the high capacity semi-automatic rifles were imported from foreign countries, and "we are trying to get rid of them." Again, I went for a repeat, just to make sure. I asked "Are you saying the NRA is to trying to get rid of high capacity semiautomatic rifles ?" He didn't hesitate. He said "Yes, our purpose is to get rid of them." So I thanked him and told him my story would be out tomorrow (Feb. 5th, 1998) So what could I conclude from this? Every time I have an NRA solicitor on the phone I am told that they don't support the Second Amendment, and now, that their PURPOSE is to GET RID OF a whole class of firearms, the class of firearms the Second Amendment was specifically enacted to protect. Even when I was insistent, to the point of being rude, that I objected to their selling out the Second Amendment, they either didn't get it, or were determined that the Second Amendment is to be abandoned. They both seemed to be genuinely embarrassed by the Second Amendment. This time I didn't get it just from the solicitor, but also from his supervisor. And not just his opinion, but as he stated it, the opinion of the NRA. So there it is folks. You can either support the Constitution, or you can support the NRA, but you cannot support the Constitution THROUGH the NRA. Long ago I gave up my NRA phone card. A couple months ago I let my NRA membership lapse. Now, I look in my wallet and find there, still, an NRA VISA. Well, that one is the walking dead. One of the men said Wayne Lapiere said we didn't want to loose members over a gun. It looks like the NRA, which has been accused over the years of refusing to compromise, has just compromised, big time. When you give up a right, in order to be "reasonable", just how reasonable will you ultimately have to become? In 1992-1993 I spent six months in Sweden. The folks there bragged that they could own any kind of gun they wanted, as long as it didn't hold over two shots. They were reasonable. And when you decide you cannot give up any more, on what solid ground will you now brace your feet? Having conceded to the elimination of one class of firearm, there is now no solid position from which the NRA can defend any firearm. That defense must now rest with those who have not compromised the Constitution. After Norville Chamberlain announced "Peace in our time", it then fell to Winston Churchill to defend England. Will appeasement defend a few "sporting" rifles? The NRA is betting the Constitution on it. Now is the time for all good men (and ladies) to get off the fence. Which side will you come down on? Either you are loyal to the Constitution, or you are disloyal. The NRA doesn't seem too proud of our Constitution. - ------------------------------------- Copyright (C) 1998, The Vigo Examiner All are free to republish at will this intact document. http://www.Vigo-Examiner.com ======================================================================== To subscribe: send a message to kemp@sportsmen.net with the word SUBSCRIBE in the subject/topic field. Use UNSUBSCRIBE to remove yourself from the list. Questions/comments/problems? email: Not Moderated@sportsmen.net or listmgmt@sportsmen.net For info about this system and its lists email: info@sportsmen.net >>>---News to Know---> "A person is a person, no matter how small!" _Dr. Seuss Announcing: the second annual Liberty Round Table essay contest, on the topic:"DEFENDING MY INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS!!!" Go to: http://home.lrt.org/lrt.essaycont2.ann.htm The biennial reorganization of county Libertarian parties and candidate filings for the November 1998 elections must be accomplished in March. For information on how to organize your county or prepare for an election compaign, contact Chuck Williams, (waterbaron@compuserve.com) or (803)681-8350. ======================================================================== via: Sportsman's Paradise~~Online 602-922-1639 - www.sportsmen.net - ---End Forwarded Msg--- - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Feb 1998 11:13:59 -0600 From: neil@jove.geol.niu.edu (Neil Dickey) Subject: Re: NRA: "Our purpose is to get rid of" (firearms) (fwd) It was forwarded in part: > Thu, 05 Feb 1998 10:04:37 -0400 (EDT), > Patricia Neill : > >Fwd from the Kemp list ... > > > NRA: "Our purpose is to get rid of them" > (high capacity semi-automatic rifles) > >by ORAL DECKARD >The Vigo Examiner > >I just got off the phone with the NRA (The Powerful gun Lobby.) I was told >repeatedly that "Our purpose is to get rid of them" (high capacity >semi-automatic rifles). [ ... ] This article doesn't square at all with a recent NRA Alert I got which calls for a campaign to reverse California State Atty. Gen'l Dan Lundgren's orders for the confiscation of modified SKS rifles. Somewhere or another, someone appears to have gotten the facts wrong. Any comments, Tanya? The opinions which I have expressed herein are entirely my own, unless other- wise noted. No-one else should be held responsible for what I think. - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- | D. N. Dickey | Virtuous motives, trammeled by inertia and | | Research Associate | timidity, are no match for armed and | | Northern Illinois Univ. | resolute wickedness. | | neil@earth.geol.niu.edu | - W. S. Churchill | | **Finger for public key** | | - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Feb 1998 10:16:47 -0800 (PST) From: Boyd Subject: Re: CAS: Starbuck Murders (fwd) I don't doubt that Ms. Lewinsky would be wise to take extra precautions, but things like : ". The Starbucks murders were big news in Washington because, as D.C. Council member Jack Evans put it, "To have a triple homicide anywhere in the District of Columbia is an unusual event" Do nothing for anybodies credibility here. The councilmans vested interest in portraying the district as lily white is as obvious as the districts reputation for crime and violence. And, while Georgetown is a -beautiful- place filled largely with "beautiful people" gangsters have humvees too and occaisionally make it beyond the edges of their normal turf. Indeed, before it's gentrification with our tax dollars in the early 70's Georgetown was not a nice place at all. Boyd (all IMO) (not saying there isn't a vast overarching conspiracy ; ) - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Feb 1998 10:16:47 -0800 (PST) From: Boyd Subject: Re: CAS: Starbuck Murders (fwd) I don't doubt that Ms. Lewinsky would be wise to take extra precautions, but things like : ". The Starbucks murders were big news in Washington because, as D.C. Council member Jack Evans put it, "To have a triple homicide anywhere in the District of Columbia is an unusual event" Do nothing for anybodies credibility here. The councilmans vested interest in portraying the district as lily white is as obvious as the districts reputation for crime and violence. And, while Georgetown is a -beautiful- place filled largely with "beautiful people" gangsters have humvees too and occaisionally make it beyond the edges of their normal turf. Indeed, before it's gentrification with our tax dollars in the early 70's Georgetown was not a nice place at all. Boyd (all IMO) (not saying there isn't a vast overarching conspiracy ; ) - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Feb 1998 12:38:25 -0600 (CST) From: Subject: CAS: (OT) Nuclear Posture Review 2/2 (fwd) - ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Wed, 4 Feb 1998 22:23:49 -0600 (CST) From: "Edward F. Immler" To: cas@majordomo.pobox.com Subject: CAS: (OT) Nuclear Posture Review 2/2 SLBMs Under START II, the SLBM force will provide about half of the 3,000 to 3,500 accountable warheads that the United States will be permitted to deploy. Because of this increased reliance on the SLBM force and the continued need for survivable weapons to enhance stability, the NPR determined that the conversion of four submarines to carry the more modern D-5 missile was appropriate. Conversion of these four submarines from the older C-4 missile ensures that the U.S. force can remain intact without danger of age-related problems crippling missiles that would carry 40 percent of SLBM warheads. The SLBM force, which is virtually undetectable when on patrol, is the most survivable and enduring element of the strategic nuclear triad. A significant portion of the SSBN force is at sea at any given time, and all submarines that are not in the shipyard for long-term maintenance can be generated during a crisis. Moreover, the Trident II (D-5) missile -- with its improved accuracy, range, and payload relative to previous SLBMs -- allows the SLBM force to hold at risk almost the entire range of strategic targets. In order to have adequate, survivable, at-sea weapons to support deterrence, accountable SLBM warhead levels need to be maintained close to the START II limit of 1,750. With the 14 SSBN option selected by the NPR, the United States will retain a significant capability to hedge against a failure of the START II Treaty or unforeseen changes in the world, because the D-5 missile loaded on the Tridents will carry fewer warheads than the maximum allowed by START Treaty limits. The 14 boat force also maintains the security of two-ocean basing, further enhancing operational effectiveness and stability. ICBMs ICBMs provide the United States a prompt-response capability. START II requires the downloading of ICBMs to one warhead, but does not place a sublimit on the total number of single-warhead ICBMs. Approximately 500 Minuteman IIIs will be retained and downloaded to one warhead apiece. ICBMs also increase the cost ratio to an adversary of attempting a first strike. Retaining approximately 500 single-warhead Minuteman IIIs provides for a reduced but prudent ICBM force. Bombers There is no START II sublimit on the number of bombers. Because bombers are dual-capable, they fulfill two important functions: they serve as an integral part of the U.S. nuclear deterrent, providing a hedge against a catastrophic failure of either the SSBN or ICBM leg of the triad, and they provide an important conventional capability in MRCs; 100 bombers in a conventional role are tasked for MRCs. Retaining 66 B-52s and 20 B-2s will allow the bombers to serve these functions. NONSTRATEGIC NUCLEAR FORCES The Nuclear Posture Review affirms that the United States has not only a national deterrent posture, but an international nuclear posture. Indeed, the United States extends the deterrent protection of its nuclear arsenal to its allies. Nowhere is this more evident than in the area of NSNF, which are not covered by START I and START II. For nearly 50 years, the United States has maintained a sizable military presence in regions deemed vital to American national interests. Alliance commitments and the unique characteristics of nonstrategic nuclear forces were primary considerations in the NPR's consideration of what the NSNF force structure should be. The Nuclear Posture Review considered numerous options, ranging from one more robust than today's structure to elimination of NSNF entirely. As a result of the NPR, the following decisions were made regarding U.S. nonstrategic nuclear force structure: * Eliminate the option to deploy nuclear weapons on carrier-based, dual-capable aircraft. * Eliminate the option to carry nuclear Tomahawk cruise missiles (TLAM/N) on surface ships. * Retain the option to deploy TLAM/N on attack submarines (although none are currently deployed, they could be deployed if needed). * Retain the current commitment to NATO of dual-capable aircraft based in Europe and CONUS and the deployment of nuclear weapons (gravity bombs) in Europe. These NSNF decisions have the effect of permanently eliminating the capability to deploy nuclear weapons on naval surface ships -- a step that could encourage the Russians to reciprocate -- while maintaining a nonstrategic nuclear force capable of fulfilling U.S. commitments to allies. COMMAND, CONTROL, COMMUNICATIONS, AND INTELLIGENCE Nuclear-related command, control, communications, and intelligence (C3I) and operations have undergone dramatic changes since the end of the Cold War. For example: * Strategic bombers are off alert. * ICBMs and SLBMs have been de-targeted. * U.S. command post structure has been reduced. * The operating tempo of the worldwide airborne command post structure has been reduced. The National Emergency Command Post, formerly used only for a nuclear role, is now the National Airborne Operation Center and is available to the Federal Emergency Management Agency for civil emergencies. * Systems endurability requirements have been reduced by two-thirds. * The C3I portion of the DoD strategic nuclear budget has been reduced from $3.4 billion to $2.1 billion. Nevertheless, to maintain viability, the C3I structure must maintain capability to carry out key missions: early warning; threat assessment; connectivity of the National Command Authority; dissemination of emergency action messages for the launch of nuclear forces, if necessary; and safe, secure force management. With these considerations in mind, the NPR made the following decisions regarding strategic C3I: * Continue adequate funding of critical programs. * Correct existing/projected communication system and tactical warning/attack assessment deficiencies. * Support intelligence systems which provide timely information and threat characterization and warning indicators. INFRASTRUCTURE In order to maintain a streamlined and adjusted nuclear posture, DoD must sustain the infrastructure to support U.S. nuclear forces. The Nuclear Posture Review focused its examination of the nuclear infrastructure on two key areas: the industrial base for strategic missiles, reentry systems, and guidance, as well as for bombers; and support by the Department of Energy (DOE), which is responsible for producing and maintaining nuclear weapons for the Department's systems. The NPR made the following infrastructure recommendations: * Replace the guidance system and re-motor those Minuteman IIIs which are retained. * Continue D-5 production past 1995 to maintain the strategic ballistic missile industrial base (this is a secondary advantage of backfitting the 14 SSBNs to be retained with the D-5 missile). * Fund the sustainment of the guidance and reentry vehicle industrial base. * With regard to bomber infrastructure, no specific funding was found to be necessary, since Stealth and commercial aircraft should keep the industrial base healthy. * Provide the Department of Energy -- the supplier of nuclear weapons -- with DoD's requirements: o Maintain nuclear weapon capability (without underground nuclear testing). o Develop a stockpile surveillance engineering base. o Demonstrate the capability to refabricate and certify weapon types in the enduring stockpile. o Maintain the capability to design, fabricate, and certify new warheads. o Maintain a science and technology base needed to support nuclear weapons. o With regard to the tritium supply to support weapons (as specified annually by the Department of Defense in its Nuclear Weapons Stockpile Memorandum), DoD and DOE must decide on a source and a production program. In order to have an upload hedge in case events require it, an accelerated decision will be needed. o No new-design nuclear warhead production is required. SAFETY, SECURITY, AND USE CONTROL The safety, security, and use controls of nuclear weapons are the solemn responsibility of those nations which possess them. The United States sets the highest international standards for the safety, security, and responsible custodianship of its nuclear arsenal. The dramatic force reductions which already have taken place since the end of the Cold War -- U.S. strategic warheads have been cut by 59 percent since 1988; nonstrategic nuclear forces have been cut by 90 percent -- have contributed greatly to the increased safety and security of U.S. nuclear weapons. As a result of these reductions, nuclear storage sites have been reduced by 75 percent. The Nuclear Posture Review concerned itself with maintaining the U.S. lead role in nuclear safety and security issues. The NPR thoroughly reviewed the recommendations of the Fail-Safe and Risk Reduction (FARR) Commission of 1992 and determined that the vast majority of them had been implemented or were well underway. Among the FARR recommendations the NPR singled out for continued implementation were: * Completing the Trident Coded Control Device (CCD) in 1997, providing for system-level CCDs or permissive action links (PALs) on all U.S. nuclear weapons by 1997. * Seeking alternatives to those recommendations that a test moratorium may preclude (for example, protection equivalent to Category F PAL on all new weapons). The Department of Defense also will re-institute a regular and realistic nuclear procedures exercise program, with participation by senior DoD civilian and military leadership, to ensure thorough understanding of nuclear procedures by this nation's nuclear stewards. THREAT REDUCTION AND COUNTERPROLIFERATION INITIATIVES The Nuclear Posture Review made adjustments to the U.S. nuclear posture unilaterally. They are consistent with, but are not required by, any new arms control agreements. There remains hope for Russia to undertake a comparable review, and to make similar adjustments in its strategic force plans, nonstrategic force plans, and ways of ensuring safety, security, and use control. When President Yeltsin came to Washington to meet with President Clinton in September 1994, they had the opportunity to discuss these adjustments, which were made possible in great measure by the new security relationship with Russia -- pragmatic partnership. At the Summit, the Presidents made important progress on a number of arms control issues and, in fact, took steps down the road of further reductions and increased cooperation on nuclear issues. The Presidents confirmed their intention to seek early ratification of the START II Treaty, once the START I Treaty enters into force, and expressed their desire to exchange START II instruments of ratification at the next U.S.-Russia Summit meeting. Once START II is ratified, the Presidents agreed to begin immediately to deactivate all strategic delivery systems to be eliminated under START II. The Presidents also instructed their experts to intensify their dialogue to compare conceptual approaches and to develop concrete steps to adapt the nuclear forces and practices on both sides to the changed international security environment, including the possibility, after ratification of START II, of further reductions and limitations on remaining nuclear forces. In this uncertain environment, traditional arms control concerns of the past are augmented by the more urgent issues of security and control of key elements of the nuclear complex, particularly the warhead, warhead component, and weapon fissile material stockpiles. The potential for loss or theft of fissile material or nondeployed nuclear warheads is a real risk to U.S. security. As such, there is merit in exploring, together with the Russians and others, initiatives that would reduce this risk. CONCLUSION In the Nuclear Posture Review, the Department of Defense has struck a prudent balance between leading the way to a safer world and hedging against the unexpected. In the post-Cold War environment, the United States continues to require a nuclear deterrent. The strategic triad has been streamlined and adjusted, as have nonstrategic nuclear forces, to account for the reduced role nuclear weapons play in U.S. national security. Major force reductions and cost savings are already underway, leading to a smaller, safer, and more secure U.S. nuclear force. - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- [ExecSec Home Page] [Table of Contents] [Top ofPage] [Next Page] ******************************************************************* Edward F. Immler There is a time to lead, ed@globaldialog.com a time to follow, and a time to just get out of the way. Great leaders know which is appropriate. ******************************************************************* ========================================================================== This mailing list is for discussion of Clinton Administration Scandals. If you wish to unsubscribe from this mailing list, send electronic mail to majordomo@majordomo.pobox.com. In the message body put: unsubscribe cas - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Feb 1998 14:39:39 -0800 (PST) From: Boyd Subject: Re: NRA: "Our purpose is to get rid of" (firearms) (fwd) Eventually, I imagine I will cease to be amazed at the rkba communities insistence on eating it's young (I have an exceptional imagination). But, until that day and as of right now this post was the most remarkable example I can think of. Talking to some contracted fulfillment house in a state with bad labor laws we can't credit that perhaps this yocum was talking for himself or perhaps simply through his hat. Hmmm. Flame on friends, I even promise not to reply. - - Boyd Kneeland NRA life, JPFO, GOA, CCRKBA, SAF, GOAL pres. Council for Legislative Action Washington, DVCF! At 11:13 AM -0600 2/5/98, Neil Dickey wrote: >It was forwarded in part: > >> Thu, 05 Feb 1998 10:04:37 -0400 (EDT), >> Patricia Neill : >> >>Fwd from the Kemp list ... >> >> >> NRA: "Our purpose is to get rid of them" >> (high capacity semi-automatic rifles) >> >>by ORAL DECKARD >>The Vigo Examiner >> >>I just got off the phone with the NRA (The Powerful gun Lobby.) I was told >>repeatedly that "Our purpose is to get rid of them" (high capacity >>semi-automatic rifles). > >[ ... ] > >This article doesn't square at all with a recent NRA Alert I got which >calls for a campaign to reverse California State Atty. Gen'l Dan Lundgren's >orders for the confiscation of modified SKS rifles. > >Somewhere or another, someone appears to have gotten the facts wrong. Any >comments, Tanya? > >The opinions which I have expressed herein are entirely my own, unless other- >wise noted. No-one else should be held responsible for what I think. > >---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >| D. N. Dickey | Virtuous motives, trammeled by inertia and | >| Research Associate | timidity, are no match for armed and | >| Northern Illinois Univ. | resolute wickedness. | >| neil@earth.geol.niu.edu | - W. S. Churchill | >| **Finger for public key** | | >---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > >- - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Feb 1998 14:39:39 -0800 (PST) From: Boyd Subject: Re: NRA: "Our purpose is to get rid of" (firearms) (fwd) Eventually, I imagine I will cease to be amazed at the rkba communities insistence on eating it's young (I have an exceptional imagination). But, until that day and as of right now this post was the most remarkable example I can think of. Talking to some contracted fulfillment house in a state with bad labor laws we can't credit that perhaps this yocum was talking for himself or perhaps simply through his hat. Hmmm. Flame on friends, I even promise not to reply. - - Boyd Kneeland NRA life, JPFO, GOA, CCRKBA, SAF, GOAL pres. Council for Legislative Action Washington, DVCF! At 11:13 AM -0600 2/5/98, Neil Dickey wrote: >It was forwarded in part: > >> Thu, 05 Feb 1998 10:04:37 -0400 (EDT), >> Patricia Neill : >> >>Fwd from the Kemp list ... >> >> >> NRA: "Our purpose is to get rid of them" >> (high capacity semi-automatic rifles) >> >>by ORAL DECKARD >>The Vigo Examiner >> >>I just got off the phone with the NRA (The Powerful gun Lobby.) I was told >>repeatedly that "Our purpose is to get rid of them" (high capacity >>semi-automatic rifles). > >[ ... ] > >This article doesn't square at all with a recent NRA Alert I got which >calls for a campaign to reverse California State Atty. Gen'l Dan Lundgren's >orders for the confiscation of modified SKS rifles. > >Somewhere or another, someone appears to have gotten the facts wrong. Any >comments, Tanya? > >The opinions which I have expressed herein are entirely my own, unless other- >wise noted. No-one else should be held responsible for what I think. > >---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >| D. N. Dickey | Virtuous motives, trammeled by inertia and | >| Research Associate | timidity, are no match for armed and | >| Northern Illinois Univ. | resolute wickedness. | >| neil@earth.geol.niu.edu | - W. S. Churchill | >| **Finger for public key** | | >---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > >- - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Feb 1998 21:22:13 -0600 (CST) From: Subject: CAS: DNC chairman too? (fwd) - ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Thu, 5 Feb 1998 17:05:43 -0600 From: george To: CAS list Subject: CAS: DNC chairman too? from http://www.insightmag.com Governor Captured Live - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ By Paul M. Rodriguez - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Picture this: Surveillance videotapes purport to show Colorado Democratic Gov. Roy Romer conducting an affair, and allegations abound. Sound familiar? olorado Gov. Roy H. "Buddy" Romer is chairman of the Democratic National Committee, or DNC, and a staunch defender of President Clinton in the latest White House sex scandal. But the married Romer, father of seven, active churchman and former trustee of the Iliff School of Theology in Denver, has some explaining of his own to do, Insight has learned. .. . . . Romer's active defense of Clinton and denunciation of the president's accusers has prompted release of previously unknown and highly confidential records that appear to show the Colorado governor in 1995 in compromising poses with a female alleged to be a former employee and longtime friend. Romer, who succeeded Donald W. Fowler as DNC chairman after the Democratic fund-raising scandals broke in 1997, repeatedly has denied in published reports going back several years that he has engaged in an extramarital affair. Specifically, he has denied an extramarital romance with Betty Jane Thornberry, once a confidential assistant to Romer at the DNC and previously a top state-paid political aide to the Colorado governor as well as a senior adviser on his many political campaigns. .. . . . The allegations first were made an issue for state voters during Romer's 1990 gubernatorial campaign against Republican John Andrews. In an effort to quash the rumors, Romer held a press conference and issued an unequivocal denial, declaring, "It's false. It's not true. I do [sic] not have an affair with B.J. Thornberry, nor have I ever. I don't have a sexual relationship with her now, nor have I ever." Blaming the press, Romer continued, "It's an interesting circumstance where you have to reply to that kind of journalism." .. . . . When the rumors resurfaced in his 1994 campaign against Bruce Benson, Romer's campaign consultant, Mike Stratton, repeated Romer's denials that he was "absolutely not" having an affair with Thornberry. Romer campaign manager Alan Salazar angrily charged at the same time that the allegations were "disgusting and it is revolting, and it is vile. [Romer's opponents are] interested in drudging up ugly gossip about old rumors that were put aside years ago." In the end, Benson reluctantly issued an "apology" and concern among the public and the press dissolved. With confidence restored by the stern denials, Romer was swept back into office with 55 percent of the vote to Benson's 39 percent. But the whispers continued. . . . . Since the Clinton sexcapades scandal broke loose in 1997 involving Paula Corbin Jones and again with Monica Lewinsky, Romer repeatedly has defended the president in much the same way as he defended himself. For example, while in San Diego recently for the Super Bowl, he declared, "This man is the leader of the free world and here we are trying him on 30-minute clips on Sunday-morning television. What we ought to say is that the charges have been made, the president has denied it and there are unanswered questions." He continued: "We're simply driving to a conclusion before the evidence is in, and that's not proper. I think it's going to damage the presidency if we continue." .. . . . Evidence is important. Insight has obtained confidential records - -- including photographs and videotapes -- purportedly showing that Romer may have had more than a platonic relationship. .. . . . The timing could not be worse for the Democratic Party -- both in terms of public image during a critical election year and also with respect to the need for fund-raising to pay down huge debts carried over from the 1996 presidential race. .. . . . The GOP, in some quarters reeling from an "everybody does it" malaise, may react weakly to the possibility of a Romer affair. Voters could go either way: They simply could be inured to the latest news or it could send them over the edge. .. . . . In the photographs and videotapes, as well as other records obtained by Insight -- allegedly obtained between April and July 1995 -- Romer is seen embracing, hugging and kissing a woman said to be Thornberry during visits to Washington. On one trip on July 22, 1995, Romer is seen on videotape kissing her. Intimacies begin in a parking lot shortly after Romer exits the terminal at Dulles International Airport in the early evening, where he waves to her. They embrace repeatedly, kiss and then enter a car belonging to Thornberry. Inside the car, with Romer in the driver's seat and the lady next to him, they again lock into an embrace and engage in kissing lasting about six minutes -- from 6:00 to 6:06 p.m., according to the confidential records. .. . . . The two also are seen kissing, hugging and holding hands on at least one other occasion during this July trip to Washington, according to the confidential records. Moreover, it appears from the photos, videos and other records that Romer spent the night at a private house located on V Street in Northwest Washington after dining with the woman at an elegant French restaurant in Northern Virginia. Leaving the restaurant at 9:05 p.m., "with their arms around one another, they walked to the back of the parking lot and into the woods, where they hugged and kissed until 9:08 p.m. They returned to her car at 9:10 p.m.," the confidential reports state. .. . . . After a roundabout drive to Washington that private surveillance teams believe was meant to throw off any would-be chasers, the woman and Romer are seen entering the V Street house owned, according to land-deed records, by a Coloradan who then worked on Capitol Hill. Shortly after 9:50 p.m., when the garage door closes, the lights in the house go on. The woman and Romer are not seen leaving the house until they do so the next morning at approximately 10:25 a.m. "Mr. Romer and Ms. Thornberry were observed getting into her car in the garage, he in the driver's seat and she in the front passenger's seat," the confidential reports state. "No luggage was observed. He backed the car out of the garage and started to drive.... He stopped for a moment and they seemed to be studying a map. He then drove away," the reports state. .. . . . The documents refer to other occasions in which Romer and a woman identified as Thornberry are seen together, including another airport meeting on May 26, 1995, when hugs and kisses also were recorded and detailed. .. . . . Romer is not known, according to state political observers, as a tactile person who generally hugs or kisses staff members. He usually does not take a security detail with him on trips, preferring to travel alone when in Washington, say the same observers, who add that the governor seldom details where he stays on trips -- even to close staff. .. . . . The origin of the surveillance documents could not immediately be learned. Sources and intermediaries who supplied the material to Insight are opponents of Romer and include members of both parties. . . . . Both in writing and during repeated telephone calls to his offices in Colorado and at the DNC in Washington, Insight asked Romer for comment. However, at press time the governor had declined to respond. .. . . . Thornberry issued a denial in 1990, saying, "The Rumor [sic] is not true. The feelings range from rage to feeling absolutely vulnerable and helpless. I feel violated." When the rumors resurfaced in 1994, she did not comment. .. . . . Darryl Elkin, acting executive director of the Colorado State Democratic Party, tells Insight, "Those rumors were put to rest long ago, and woe to anybody to try [to resurface them]. Anybody trying to resurrect that is politically motivated." Indeed, sourcing for the confidential records delivered to Insight can be linked to political opponents of Romer upset at the continued public perception that the Colorado governor is morally above reproach when, according to them, he is not. "It's bad for the party that this is going on.... It needs to come out now so we can get it behind us," says one Democratic source claiming knowledge of the issue. . . . . When he was tapped by Clinton to succeed Don Fowler as head of the DNC, Romer swept into Washington not just as a sitting governor but as a stalwart and shining star of the Democratic Party; an Orion of ethics, honesty and straight shooting. He promised Clinton, Congress and the American people that he would get to the bottom of alleged wrongdoing at the DNC involving fund-raising practices that elicited substantial attention and concern about improper and illegal activities. As a result of these alleged misdeeds, some admitted by DNC officials, the party has plummeted deeply into debt currently estimated to be about $10 million. .. . . . Grabbing control of the DNC from Fowler, Romer declared he had taken Clinton's offer because "what's important is... the people, the ideas and values that drive the system, rather than excessive money and so on. That's why I took this job." And in a January 1997 appearance on CNN's Inside Politics, Romer distanced himself from Fowler when he declared, "Don was in charge [of] a system that, frankly, was overwhelmed with volume, and they had inadequate procedures in place." . . . . But the problem at the DNC had begun, however coincidentally, with Clinton's March 1996 appointment of Thornberry as the DNC's executive director. Thornberry accepted some responsibility for the DNC's lax donor-vetting system but claimed there "was no way in the world" to control the checks -- numbering more than 30,000. But she conceded, "We've made mistakes, and we take it very seriously." In addition, Thornberry admitted she had "misgivings" about John Huang's May 1995 trip to Taiwan to meet with prospective donors but decided to approve it nonetheless. .. . . . Thornberry began her political career as a councilwoman in Craig, Colo., and in 1982 took the reins of the reelection campaign of then-state treasurer Romer. After successfully managing that campaign, she became his deputy state treasurer and later served as his chief of staff for most of his first two terms as governor. After Clinton's election, Thornberry was appointed to the Interior Department, where she quickly became embroiled in controversy. .. . . . In early 1995, the White House was called by and on the behalf of Suzanna Hubbell, the wife of former associate attorney general Webster Hubbell, who had been forced to resign in 1994 after he pleaded guilty to fraud and tax charges. One of the calls was made by Interior's then-deputy chief of staff Thornberry on Feb. 6 to White House aide and Clinton confidante Bruce Lindsey. Later that day, Lindsey contacted Thornberry to assure her that the White House Counsel's Office was going to approve Hubbell's reinstatement at the Interior Department. That same day, Suzanna Hubbell officially was reinstated at her $59,022 job, according to news reports. .. . . . Nor was controversy absent during Thornberry's tenure at the DNC. Despite amassing as much as $15 million in debt and being forced to return nearly $3 million in improper contributions, she was retained at the DNC through the first year of Romer's chairmanship. In early December she resigned to become chief of staff to Dwight Robinson, deputy secretary of Housing and Urban Development. She has not returned Insight's telephone calls offering her a chance to comment. .. . . . Revelations of Romer's alleged intimate encounters have come at a prickly time for Democrats as they rock and reel over continued federal criminal probes of the fund-raising debacle and newly explosive sex scandals involving the president just 10 months before midterm congressional elections. As the national spokesman for the Democratic Party, second only to Clinton, Romer has been under extreme pressure to portray his president and party as representing the highest values of the American people. It has become a difficult task, as several indictments already have been obtained by a joint Justice Department-FBI task force looking into illicit fund-raising, and Congress is expected to make further referrals for follow-up criminal investigations. .. . . . As the nation confronts moral and ethical issues about public officials as a result of the alleged Clinton sexcapades, photographs and other evidence of Romer's apparent intimate encounters add fuel to an already explosive and volatile national debate about political leadership. .. . . . The Romer problem, like the Clinton scandal, seems likely to involve the perception of betrayal of public trust by a politician hiding behind lawyerly lingo. When stories in Colorado first suggested Romer was conducting an affair with Thornberry, voters expressed grave concern and told pollsters and journalists that, while a private matter, proof of infidelity would undermine the moral leadership of the governor and reflect poorly on his likely effectiveness if reelected -- unless he could disprove the charges. As in the first Clinton defense against the now-infamous Gennifer Flowers revelations, it seemed the Romer response was masterful in deflecting attention from his alleged improper behavior. . . . . Colorado Democrats and Republicans said they had heard for several months that damning evidence existed of a romance involving Romer. Officials at the DNC and the RNC said they had no knowledge of any such materials, though they had heard the rumors over a period of years as well - -- rumors that Romer repeatedly had denied. .. . . . White House officials had no comment. .. . . . .. . . . - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jennifer G. Hickey contributed to this article. ========================================================================== This mailing list is for discussion of Clinton Administration Scandals. If you wish to unsubscribe from this mailing list, send electronic mail to majordomo@majordomo.pobox.com. In the message body put: unsubscribe cas - - ------------------------------ End of roc-digest V2 #64 ************************