THE MOUNTAIN OBSERVER

Vol. 4             Issue 4         05/13/04    (FINAL SNAIL MAIL LETTER)                                                    

A FREEWHEELING CONSERVATIVE COMMENTARY DEDICATED TO THE DEFENSE OF FREEDOM, THE NEXT GENERATION, AND THE WAY THINGS OUGHT TO BE.   TO UNDERSTAND THIS NEWSLETTER, IT IS NECESSARY THAT YOU ARE ABLE TO READ AND TO THINK.

Produced occasionally when I decide to do it, but at least 6 times a year.                                                                                                        J. E. Sohmer, P. O. Box 129, Jefferson, CO 80456

Flyover country, where the air is thin and the hunting and fishing are good.

***************************************************************************

SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES:

"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."                             (It's not about hunting ducks.)

Pull up www.ClintonGunBan.com for a gun rights perspective of the ‘90’s.  Work to defeat H.R. 2038 this Fall.

See a SPECIAL ANNOUNCEMENT on the last page.

Note: MountainObserver@2ndAmendment.net

Blowing off steam:

I am concerned about likely public confusion over the difference between the so-called 09/11Commission initiated by Congress, and the Intelligence Commission initiated by the President.  With its final report due out this summer, the 09/11Commission has predictably become a political finger pointing and blame finding exercise, excepting Congress itself, in a presidential election year.  Its focus has been on 09/11.  Recognizing the broader issue of intelligence failures over many years, extending back into the Cold War era, and up to the current time, the President correctly determined the long overdue need to examine in depth the nation’s intelligence systems.

So it was that last year he announced the formation of a separate Intelligence Commission to investigate all dimensions of American intelligence performance, presumably from about 1960 forward.  It is to report by 03/31/05, specifically to focus its efforts in a de-politicized environment.  A major reason for the broader examination is a recognition that many of the current problems go back to an institutional failure to adjust from the requirements of the Cold War to the challenges posed by stateless terrorism.  I’m sure that many findings of the 09/11Commission will be useful in support of this broader effort, but the public should be aware of the different and more comprehensive effort, and why the work of the Presidents Intelligence Commission is necessary.

Things are not going as smoothly in Iraq as we might have wished, but perspective is in order.  Iraq has become a magnet for the worst of the worst, from around the world.  Better there than here.  While many of us have been skeptical about western style democracy in the Middle East, it is far too early to predict the outcome of the general effort to encourage something better than desert tribalism.   Saddam and his sons are gone.   The WMD is still unresolved, and so remains a serious concern.   As for Iraq itself, we need to be focused on security issues of direct interest to ourselves, and this is a tough and complex matter.   One can only hope and pray that a sufficient number of American voters this fall recognize the need to keep adults in charge.  None of what is happening raises any question on my part regarding the President’s basic logic about the War on Terror.  I only wish that Condoleezza Rice was Secretary of State.  There are times when war is an imperative, not an option, and there are times when the option of war is the only road to peace.   The Spanish will discover this, now, the hard way.   Actually, the Spanish have a special problem with Islam, rooted in history, and may find itself a special target.  But back to Iraq.  The bottom line is that we have no choice but to prevail over Islamic Fascism, which is exactly what it is.  They are determined to destroy us, and were so years ago.  That is our national security issue, and the yardstick by which people must be measured.

As I am writing this particular item, the nation, or at least the press, which likes to confuse itself with the nation, is in the midst of a hissy fit over public revelation of the apparent “mistreatment” of some Iraqi prisoners by some American MP’s.   Irrespective of the facts, we can agree that the PR is not good, and perception can be more pertinent than reality.   Everyone I know would agree that if there was misconduct by any of our people, then our standards of justice should apply, swiftly and transparently.   However, the general matter begs a list of questions and other matters to consider:

1). If there was misconduct, where, exactly, in the chain of command did things go wrong, and how? The matter is too important to just fry 8 fish at the bottom of the food chain and consider the matter closed.

            2). Except for the mistake of releasing pictures, and the story, did anything, in fact, go wrong?

At this point the public knows little about the Iraqis involved.  Presumably, they were in custody for a reason.  We are in a war, and there are certain techniques to the gathering of intelligence from bad people.

3). A lot of Americans of the current generation, unfamiliar with the realities of war, overdosed on “civil   rights”, and spoon fed a steady diet of “hate America first”, seem to be reacting with “horror”.  Our enemies, at various levels, foreign and domestic, fully appreciate the opportunity this presents to exploit the matter in the context of our own national soft headedness.   The opportunity they will wish to exploit is a corollary to the Mogadishu Syndrome, most recently applied by them in Spain.   To test my point, consider the decibel levels of objection in this matter compared to the silence, or near silence, to   years of sadistic abuse of Iraqis, and Americans, by whoever is currently complaining, foreign or domestic.  Clearly the “concern” and “horror” has less to do with the treatment of prisoners than it has to do with pumping up the American public into a political panic in support of various agendas.  We have been set up by 40 years of political correctness, and our Islamist enemies know it.   Meanwhile, Iraqis supporting our efforts (most of them), having lived under Saddam for 30 years, hardly recognize the issue.

4). Generic Islamists aside, Iraqis themselves are clearly conflicted about the fact that it required the United States, a western secular/Judeo-Christian nation, and a democratic republic, to liberate them from Saddam.  There is a lot of hurt pride, and the matter at hand, made public, does not help heal raw wounds, perhaps with serious consequences for our efforts.  But we should keep our own self-flagellation under control and not allow our own misgivings to be useful to those who would cynically attempt to cash in, when they, themselves, find no objection to rape, torture chambers, shredders and 12 year olds strapped with explosives.   Proportion is called for.  There are 135000 troops in Iraq.  Questions surround the actions of perhaps 8.   Donald Rumsfeld is the right man in the right place at the right time.  Carry on.  His critics are aiding and abetting the enemy, as usual.

5). While the politically correct are in a snit about the fraternity party antics of a handful of American prison personnel, our enemies, shouting praises to Allah, wield dull knives to saw off the head of an American contractor.  In case you haven’t figured out what is going on, the selective “rage” and “horror” all has a single purpose, which is to scare us out of Greater Arabia.  What genuinely terrifies our enemies is the thought of our possible success in introducing western concepts of democracy, tolerance and respect for life into this arena of hate.  Perhaps they sense that Islam itself is threatened, and they might be right, though that is not our purpose.  I would suggest we are witnessing the behavior of cornered  rats.  Those of us who prefer to run will vote this fall for the Democrat candidate, TBD.  Real Americans, understanding the discussion, will vote for President George W. Bush.    Perhaps you are offended by my bluntness, but that is the way it is.

6). My real horror is witnessing the attempt by some who call themselves Americans to engage in attempts at moral equivalency between the behavior of a handful of our prison personnel and the actions of the butchers of Nick Berg.  This is moral relativism run out to the end of the rope.  I pray that God will grant Nick Berg absolution and peace.  Few of us knew this young American Jew, but he was one of us.  It will happen again.   We are looking directly at the face of evil.     It is time to sort out our priorities.

Pat Buchanan, heavily invested in what can appear, from time to time, to be Anti-Semitism, is simply wrong about our decision to move on Iraq.  It appears that he has been drawn into a left-wing corner that is beyond denial on the matter of terrorism.  The intersection of hard paleo-conservative thinking with that of Deaniacs is curious, and deserves further development at another time.  However, in brief, the paleo-conservative thesis demonstrates the convoluted results of a priority given to imagined ideological purity.   I am not driven by rigid ideology, but objective reality.  When I describe myself as an American Nationalist Conservative, it is the consequence and product of objective analysis, not ideology.   Again, Sohmer’s first law of politics: nationalism trumps ideology every time.  Some will say that proves their point about the hopelessness of an Iraqi nationalism, as opposed to the centrifugal pull of Kurds, Shiites and Sunnis, but in the Iraqi context it is a case too easy to make.  As computer folks say, there are other programs running in the background, such as Baathist secularism vs. Wahhabi fundamentalism, and western economic success vs. abject Arab failure.  So there is a tug-of-war going on within Iraq as to how nationalism will finally manifest itself, with implications for the rest of the Arab/Persian world.  It is in our national interest, and security interest, to lance the Islamist infection.  Meanwhile, genuine conservatives accept as a matter of objective reality that human nature is what it is, and has been for thousands of years, and that includes recognition of the social foundation of the family in civilized societies, and its ethnic context.   Actually, conservatism is not an ideology at all, but a process of organic analysis of the world as it is, accepting it as it is.   On the other hand, “progressives”, and under this umbrella I include all the various manifestations of secular humanism, consider human nature malleable and improvable, generally through secular state action, inevitably with the help of a sledge hammer.  Thus various ideologies of Statism.  Thus the horrors of the Twentieth Century, so blindly ignored by paleo-conservatives (America Firsters) in the late 1930’s up through December 6^th, 1941.   America’s response on December 8^th was nationalistic, and properly so.  So it is that I do not see it as an American interest, or in the interests of the public safety of American citizens, to ignore the reality of deadly threats against our nation.  As was true on December 8^th, 1941, there is a time to act in our self defense, and, in the American vision of freedom, it is not necessary to seek the permission of others to do so.  Internationalists need not apply.  The apparent paradox of a Pat Buchanan hanging out with the Dems on the issue of Iraq can only be understood by recognizing their common investment in the priority of rigid ideologies, however dissimilar those ideologies may, or may not be, but in common citing excuses and assigning blame elsewhere than to the responsible parties.   We did not force the Japanese to attack Pearl Harbor.   They chose to do it.   We did not force Hitler to strike at Poland in the East, or Belgium, Holland and France in the West.   He chose to do it, and Germans being Germans let him.   It was through no initiative on our part that North Korea struck the south.  We did not force al Qaeda terrorists to fly planes into buildings.  They chose to do it.  Ideological explanations blaming America are not the framework of useful analysis.   So it is that the demonization of Israel, neocons, and George W. Bush, serves merely as an excuse for failing to objectively analyze the real issues, assign actual responsibility, and engage in an appropriate response.  Failure to be honest about the facts, and failure to take action, merely invites further depredation and encourages the malignant to fester and grow, which is neither conservative nor far-sighted.

To me, the paleo-conservative charge of “empire” is foggy in definition.  To begin with I reject the premise that “empire”, per say, is necessarily all bad.  Imperial activities succeed or fail as a function of how they are managed, including the recognition of practical limits.   There are those who condemn the settlement of the American West as “empirical”, and certainly our many actions on the frontier against Indians, Mexicans, the Spanish and the British were frequently “pre-emptive” in nature, but necessary.  Certain specific incidents aside, as an American nationalist conservative, I have no apologies to make for the creation of this nation.  Beyond our continental borders, with the possible exception of the Philippines and Hawaii, the so-called American Empire has had no territorial ambitions.    Statist regimes like the Soviet and Nazi empires did.  Europe has been at it for centuries.   The British sought territory for commercial reasons, but in retreat left constructive legacy.   One keeps hearing a need to return to founding principles and the Monroe doctrine in the case against “empire”.   I find nothing in my studies of the Founders that suggests any sense of fear in defending our shores, by extension, if necessary, or engaging in commercial relationships of mutual benefit.   We did, after all, kick out the British, and that was not easy.   In our early days, I think what we saw was a healthy sense of the limits of American power and our ability to project ourselves, such as might have been useful for our own defense.  In those days we had no power, and our policies reflected that reality, but this did not deter a President Jefferson from sending Marines to the shores of Tripoli after pirates, or cutting a deal with Napoleon for Louisiana at the risk of annoying the British and the Spanish.  We did what we could do within the limits of our power to do so.   The Monroe Doctrine itself was not a statement of isolation but rather a warning, and a clarification of our priorities, and has lately been misrepresented as isolationist (hide under the pillow) doctrine.

Today we are faced with ICBM threats in unfriendly hands, Soviet suitcase nukes never properly accounted for and assorted other items of the Devil in the Devil’s hands.  In the contemporary context, to stand by and be reactive to theses matters is suicidal and certainly not conservative at several levels.  Survival demands, on occasion, measured pre-emption, and an appreciation of the cost of American freedom.  The judicious application of force in defense of this Republic is appropriate in the context of the War on Terrorism.   So as for Pat Buchanan’s concern with “empire”, I think he is mis-using the word, and the concept.   Setting aside any discussion of his motives, which to me are unclear, what Pat describes as American “empire” building has, in fact, overall been a defensive response, occasional mis-adventures excepted, to legitimate American interests, a process ongoing on a comprehensive international level, at least since December 7, 1941.   Aviation, and various micro technologies, has made a difference in the definition of our shoreline.   In the current context the western world is under assault by a widespread and determined Islamist fanaticism that has been building for decades.   Oil and Israel are not the culprits, but they are certainly factors in shaping a necessary response.  Christians do have an interest in Jews, and Jerusalem.   Hurling as epithets such terms as “empire” and “neoconservative” is not constructive and does not advance useful discussion.

A further comment on “neocons”.   One has to take Irving Kristol at his word.  Neocons have sought to “convert the Republican party, and American conservatism in general, against their respective wills, into a new kind of conservative politics suitable to governing a modern democracy”.   Perhaps so, and I applaud the candor, however I, personally, find this statement a bit offensive.   Setting aside the fact that I tend not to do things against my will, it is a bit brash, representing yourself as a conservative, to just walk in on a party, especially of conservatives, and explain how things are about to be different.  In fact, the notion is so absurd that I do not see it as a credible threat.    That is not to say that neocons have nothing useful to say, however what a Pat Buchanan sees as a takeover of the conservative cause, I wave off as a healthy intellectual challenge to be examined in its substantive particulars.  (Actually, we have a more serious problem with Libertarians, but that is a different discussion.)  You should not reject ideas because they are new, but because they are bad.  As a conservative, my natural automatic response to any new idea is “no”, but at the same time it is only healthy that a reality check privately ensues.  I am against change for the sake of change, but I will accept change if the facts persuasively demonstrate something better, which is generally not the case.  However one has to have both the courage and humility to engage in self refection.  So it is that a knee-jerk rejection of everything that comes out of a neocon’s mouth as “bad” is a bit shallow, as, in fact, is the label itself pejoratively used.  I prefer to take specific ideas and examine the merits of their application to specific circumstances, and develop a response consistent with my conservative core beliefs.  

One must admit that the notion of democracy in the Middle East, as opposed to al Qaeda, or Hamas, is really not a bad idea.  The practical problem of encouraging implementation is another matter, but the fact is that in the absence of change, there will never be peace in the region.   Difficulty is not a responsible excuse to walk away, especially with our own security at stake.   What is necessary is to determine, execute, and follow up with a practical calibrated response to these challenges, consistent with an integrated set of core policy and direction.  This is difficult in the current American culture that insists on instant solutions and “good feelings”.

Now another part of Mr. Kristol’s quote above jumps out at me.     “--suitable to governing a modern (?) democracy” in the context of the discussion comes across as code for large socially active central government, to me, disturbingly Liberal, and progressive, in origin.  Perhaps Mr. Kristol would take exception to this interpretation; this is the sort of discussion that needs to happen, but the comment is not reflective of conservative thought.   After many years of practice, I have a pretty sensitive political antenna.  The origins and history of neoconservative thought is pertinent.

Now our President, like his father before him, has a problem as President in that he is personally really a nice and decent fellow.   So in the current manifestation of “a new tone in Washington” and “compassionate conservatism”, the President was gone way beyond the point of reasonableness in his repeated attempts to accommodate Liberals, over-the-top Democrats, the United Nations, France, Germany, Mexico, Yasser Arafat and a thousand other parasites on the ass of freedom and American generosity.  His reward has been to continuously run into stone walls, his protagonists, misidentifying his motives with their own, misinterpreting genuine good will for weakness and stupidity, and horrified at the thought of God.   It remains to be seen how many of his cards he will be able to call in this November.  I am not optimistic, but I pray every day that I am wrong.  My America is under heavy cultural assault.   I thought I understood the American people in 1992, and I failed to understand the depth of the cultural corruption.  The alternative to a Bush win this year would be a disaster, and the subversives among us will have won.  The rats are coming out of the dump.  I can foresee the day when the final survival of the Republic will depend on the elevation of one really tough son-of-a-bitch willing to take some extraordinary actions.  Where is John Wayne?

John F. Kerry, the French looking guy, Catsup Queen pimp and self-proclaimed everyday populist (I’d like him to show me a single decent truck stop anywhere in the Commiewealth of Taxachusetts) at the moment appears  to be the Dem’s best & brightest.  His voting record documents him to be the biggest Liberal in the  Senate, even more so than his partner Ted the Swimmer Kennedy.    This ought to be, for George W. Bush, like shooting fish in a barrel, except that the Republican capacity to muck things up has never been overstated.    In any event I am looking forward to an explanation of the cost of the BIG DIG, (15 Billion) which you and I are helping to pay for, and if you don’t know what I am talking about, it proves my point about the depth of the cultural corruption.  [Why don’t you know what I am talking about?]

Bill Frist, Senate Majority “Leader”, once again proved himself to be an empty suit when he hung his own top aid, Manuel Miranda, out to dry in the serious flap over leaked Democrat memos, again proving that Ted the Swimmer Kennedy is in charge.   If Republicans can establish an actual majority control in November, I hope they can find someone with an actual set of balls to run the place.   I find people like Frist to be absolutely disgusting.   I left the land of Rockefeller Republicanism behind in 1979 when I moved to Colorado.

Corrections:

None.

Bush Score Card:                                          

Excellent:

Hang tough, my man.   Your critics have guaranteed continued mayhem in Iraq until after this fall’s elections, terrorist investing themselves in a victory by the Democrats, imagining, reasonably, a Spanish result.

Your domestic political critics either do not seem to understand this problem, or do, and have personal priorities that trump loyalty to this country.  Our servicemen and women will pay the extra price.

Not So Good:

You need to work harder on the spending problem.

If you, and the GOP, are able to win this fall, it will have less to do with GOP party competence than with greater DNC incompetence, a possibility.   The GOP’s greatest asset is your personal integrity, and your leadership against terrorism.   However, in terms of political mechanics, both parties are a mess.

Wall Street & Main Street:

The economy has really begun to take off.  Nationally, all the numbers are looking good, so good that there is misplaced nervousness on Wall Street about the likelihood of interest rates nudging up, as if that would necessarily make a difference.    Meanwhile, increasing tax receipts are beginning to take the edge off the deficit numbers, but, of course the real solution to that matter is a massive actual reduction in spending.

With the mainstream popular press at full throttle to defeat Bush and Conservatives in general this Fall, it is important to keep our heads on straight about the factors that are actually driving fuel prices in the current world climate.  In no particular order, items to consider:

1). Saudi Arabia.   The Royal Family today is in a lot of trouble with itself, its neighbors and with the United States.   Their bank accounts are in poor shape, and, from their perspective, they cannot afford a further slide in their income stream.  On the flip side, the Arab component of OPEC is in weak shape, which is to say they actually are not in a position to push their price demands so far as to saw off the branch they’re perched on.

2). Of primary concern is Venezuela, and its mercurial President Hugo Chavez, a Castro wannabe, who has been wrecking his country’s oil industry, and his country, for over a year.  It is on this foreign dependency for oil that we are actually most vulnerable today, and most threatened, simply because this guy is irrational.

3). Our inventories of crude oil are at their lowest in many years, largely due, to make a long story short, to international economic and political instability that has created an unfriendly international investment climate for petroleum.   Part of that discussion is the growth of the Chinese and Indian economies.

4). Gas pump prices, however, are higher mostly due to a lack of refinery and pipeline capacity caused over the last 30 years by a growing regulatory and environmental cloud emanating from Washington D.C.   The time and cost of struggling with these issues is clearly a disincentive to investment, such as it has become for the nuclear power industry.  (So it is in 2004 few people stop to realize that their computers are powered mostly by coal).

5). However, never underestimate the ability of the free market to bob to the surface.  Currently, gasoline prices, adjusted for inflation, are still, by far, a bargain compared to those handed off by Jimmy G-wizz Carter to Ronald Reagan in the very early ‘80’s.  So quit your bitchin.  Besides that, it takes BIG BUCKS from the private side to sustain viable windmill farms and Archer Daniels Midland.  Eventually the free market will solve all these problems, real and imagined, except all this would happen faster if the political types would get out of the way and end the subsidies.  Invest in Canadian water pipeline companies.  Western soybean and corn growers would have a bright future, and there is still a lot of oil and gas under the Rocky Mountains and the Gulf of Mexico.  There are those in the industry who are looking at evidence that the stuff is still being formed by heat and pressure acting on primordial pools of methane.  Calm down, and remember that the pricing mechanism of a free economy is the most reliable salve for “shortages”.  The government will never cut the mustard.

General Motors produced its last Oldsmobile on April 29^th.    Sad for some of us, but the free market is properly ruthless in its discipline.

Ad Nausium:

John F. Kerry bears a striking resemblance to a starved out St. Bernard (French Alps, don’t you know) but so too does the entire Democrat Party.   There are some Democrats getting nervous about his candidacy.  He does not always really appear to be awake, especially to political realities outside of New England.  Poking him with a stick won’t do it.  Actually his poll numbers seen to rise when he takes time off from campaigning.  Perhaps the campaign against the President would go better if they sent him on an extended vacation to British Columbia until November.   Joking aside, all this angst on the part of Democrats about John Kerry flies past the real problem, which is not John Kerry, but Democrats themselves.  It is getting harder and harder to find good candidates for any national or state level office when the real problem is the message, and their marxist friends in the media are not any help.  Democrats are eating themselves alive with a secular, collectivist and internationalist message that is at least 75 years old.  They act like 17 Year Cicadas, except every 2 years.

I understand that Teresa Heinz Catsup Kerry refuses to release her tax returns.  How does one expect John F. Kerry the pimp to lead the country, much less the free world, when he is unable to manage his wife?  Aspiring guy politicians: If you have nothing yourself, never marry a woman with $500 million in the bank, even more so if she never lifted a finger to earn it in the first place.  She will think she is your boss, and she will be right.

A larger issue is the fact that that as Islamists perceive the possibility of his election, the attacks on our troops will only grow in boldness.

Finally, the US Supreme Court gets one right, as with its recent 5/4 decision in Vieth vs. Jubelirer.  As I read it, with broad implications beyond the issues of the specific case in question, the Court very correctly backed out of making a political decision that properly belongs to Congress, and to state legislatures.   In a delusional fit I would like to imagine that perhaps at least 5 of the Justices have actually been reading these letters.  Pennsylvania Democrats will have to look elsewhere for votes than the court system.  Perhaps the Florida Supreme Court will take the hint.

It appears that Col. Muammar Qaddafi has experienced an attitude adjustment with regard to Libya’s accumulation of weapons of mass destruction.  Plane loads of material and documentation have been released to the United States for detailed examination and verification, and connections with Pakistan, North Korea and Iran have surfaced.  It is, as they say, a breaking story moving in many directions at the same time.  At this point it would appear reasonable to conclude the following general points:

1). It is difficult to conclude that Qaddafi was not influenced in his decision by viewing pictures of Saddam Hussein emerging from the rat hole.

2). In a post-Soviet era, and given an emerging American policy of pre-emption against terrorism, Qaddafi has probably concluded that the jig was up.  International sanctions against his regime were taking a toll, and further defiance was a dead end road.

3). What is not so clear to me, however, is whether we are actually witnessing an act of contrition, or a tactical change in strategy.  There is something about all this that strikes me as missing.  Perhaps I would be better convinced if I was to see an endorsement of all this by his hot-blooded son.

Meanwhile, the British and American governments should be congratulated on getting Libya to come this far.

In Afghanistan, Pat Tillman loses his life, because like every other soldier in the War on Terror he was, and they are, magnificent people.  God bless them all.

We do not now know what Iraq will look like politically in 20 or 50 years.  I will find it sufficient that it would be peaceful to others, and to its own component parts.  I would only remind you again of Sohmer’s Law: Nationalism Trumps Ideology Every Time.  In the case at hand, it remains to be seen what this actually means.

Canada is a beautiful place, and I have always enjoyed my visits, although it has been awhile.  Generally I recollect its people as being courteous and gracious.   Politically, Canada’s problem has always been that it is two countries, even rump states of Britain and France, while pretending to be otherwise in self defense against the economic and cultural goliath to its south.  I wish Canadians well, but they disappoint.  They have no single, focused national muscle, and are ripe for takeover by internationalists, if, indeed, this has not already occurred.

So-called conservatives in Canada will be making a huge and fatal error if they allow the elevation to leadership of Belinda Stronach, friend of OJ Billyboy.  No further comment at this time.

In Florida, Terri Schiavo’s life hangs by a thread because of a lack of legal presumption for life.

Survival tip, on the road or alone in the mountains:  In your “possibles” bag you should always have a heavy sewing needle and needle nose pliers to work small repairs on leather or heavy denim.  A good substitute for sinew is waxed dental floss, preferably the tape type.  Forget the white color: in a couple of days it won’t matter.

Political Targets: 2004, or ASAP

Target John McCain, ASAP, trolling for the VP slot on the Democrat ticket, for party disloyalty and attempting to subvert the wartime President of his own party.  If he wants to be a Democrat, then he should re-register.  If he wants to be a Republican, then he should unambiguously support his President, especially in wartime.  If  he has serious issues with both parties, then he should register as an independent.  The fact that he can do none of the above, identifies him as a political fake like John F. Kerry, a man without a moral center.   Post 09/11, the Vietnam combat currency is exhausted.

Prediction:

We are at very high risk of terrorist attack on or before November 9.   Terrorists have learned that they can influence western elections, and they very much want Democrats, who they perceive as soft and vulnerable, to win this fall in the United States.   Remember Spain.  This is a hard reality, and recognition of this fact is what will divide the electorate.   I really do not want to have to say “I told you so”.   Should they succeed before Election Day, I pray that the electorate will not be bullied.  Real Americans have a world-view that Europeans, Kofi Anan, and, apparently, certain Democrats will never understand.

One also has to wonder about the safety of the upcoming Olympics in Athens, Greece.

Heartland rebellion update:

Home schooling continues to spread, and its product continues to outperform.  The long range strategic significance of this genuine rebellion cannot be overstated.

SPECIAL ANNOUNCEMENT:   Note: MountainObserver@2ndAmendment.net  (Good to Go)

                                                            www.ConservativeAnswers.com  (Keep Checking)

This is the last edition of the old fashioned letter.   By the time you get this we should be on-line, these letters replaced by the new website, on which we will be able to do so much more.  The current format is restricted by the economics of 1^st Class postage, and as a practical matter is not interactive.  The website will also, obviously, enjoy the benefits of an unlimited market. 

With the capacity of the web, I will be able to develop whole new areas of interest, and resource support, which are currently impossible.   A lot of data has already been pulled together, and is “waiting in the wings”.   While the site will have been launched, and sufficient to replace this letter, its development and maturity will take awhile before I am satisfied.  So prepare to laugh and cry with me as you watch this old goat roper teach himself the skills of being his own webmaster, but I am determined to prevail.

Those of you who are paid subscribers to this letter, worry not.  I will take care of you.  Go to the website for details.       E-mail your thoughts; I now have access on the road.

It will take time, because I am still out-on-the-road (I am writing this in Dallas), and at home I’m building a new cabin (This summer it gets a finished roof).  I really look forward to getting off the road.  The real purpose of my efforts, educational and informational, will be easier to develop and present, on the web.                        JES.

CURRENT READING RECOMMENDATIONS:

1.)  IN DENIAL: HISTORIANS, COMMUNISM & ESPIONAGE     

            EARL HAYNES & HARVEY KLEHR

            ENCOUNTER                                                    300 PGS                                   $25.95

2.)  THE HIGH COST OF PEACE: HOW WASHINGTON'S MIDDLE EAST POLICY LEFT AMERICA VULNERABLE TO TERRORISM                                                                

            YOSSEF BODANSKY

            PRIMA                                                              652 PGS                                   $27.95

3.) THE YOM KIPPER WAR: THE EPIC ENCOUNTER THAT TRANFORMED THE MIDDLE EAST

            ABBRAHAM RABINOVICH                                           

            SCHOCKEN BOOKS                                         544 PGS                                   $27.50

God Bless America

                                                            JIM                                      

JIM SOHMER                 

AMERICAN NATIONALIST CONSERVATIVE

                                                            JEFFERSON, CO 80456

MountainObserver@2ndAmendment.net  (Good to Go)            www.ConservativeAnswers.com  (Keep Checking)

                                                                           IN GOD WE TRUST