Redemptionis Sacramentum

The long-awaited Instruction from the Congregation for Divine Worship and Discipline of the Sacraments, dated March 25, was promulgated today.

And today is when we can read it: isn't the Internet grand?

I'm telling you, Faithful Reader, were such immediate communication available during Vatican II, we wouldn't be in nearly the mess we're in: back then, information about the Council and its teachings reached the general public — even the general Catholic public — almost entirely through mainstream media and ecclesiastical professionals, many of whom must have had intentions other than merely conveying what the Council taught.

P.S. I link to the EWTN version because I think it is much easier to read than the one at the Vatican website.

Lane Core Jr. CIW P — Fri. 04/23/04 07:59:06 PM
Categorized as Religious.

"Disclosure By the Kerrys"

Democrats in Self-Destruct Mode CCLXIX

The perverts partisans politicians journalists at the New York Times complain about the Heinz Kerrys.

Senator John Kerry's two tours of combat duty in Vietnam should have prepared him well for the political firefight that is part of the daily slog in a presidential campaign. Yet his team seemed caught off guard in delivering on his promise of full disclosure of his war records. Detailed documents have finally been released, but only after the Bush campaign began questioning whether Mr. Kerry might somehow be hiding something in his war record. It should have been no surprise to Mr. Kerry that the Republicans took advantage of the news vacuum he created by withholding his records — not after President Bush's recent discomfort over questions about his own Vietnam-era service at home in the Texas Air National Guard.

Rapid and full disclosure, especially on this topic, should be a political no-brainer for Mr. Kerry. The documents released so far back up his campaign narrative depicting a war hero who was decorated three times for wounds and cited for "great personal courage under fire." But a presidential campaign is ever a learning experience tucked inside a cauldron. Mr. Kerry was slow to disclose his operation for prostate cancer, and he has still not fully released his medical records.

We hope the senator realizes that there cannot be too much disclosure by a candidate seeking the trust of the public for the nation's highest office.

With this high standard in mind, we urge that the candidate's wife, Teresa Heinz Kerry, release her tax returns. Limited financial records of Mrs. Heinz Kerry, a millionaire heiress, are available as part of the Senate's disclosure requirements. Beyond that, Mrs. Heinz Kerry points out that she is not the candidate and deserves some privacy.

But, again, the path to the presidency can be rooted only in winning the public's trust; numerous past candidates have acknowledged that extra burdens are fairly placed on close family members. Geraldine Ferraro learned that the hard way 20 years ago. The Mondale-Ferraro ticket was bogged down for a month of controversy before Ms. Ferraro finally prodded her husband, John Zaccaro, to release his tax records.

Beyond that precedent, Mrs. Heinz Kerry's personal fortune has already come into political play. The senator took out a $6 million loan on one of their houses to help finance his campaign. They may file separate tax returns, but the comfort of the Kerrys' assets is a fact of life in the senator's campaign. The public is entitled to more detail, even though nothing nefarious has been alleged.

One of the few sources of comfort for voters in this endless presidential campaign is that there is time to learn what they need to know about the candidates before the conventions in late summer. As the newcomer to the national election stage, Mr. Kerry has more to tell, and more to lose by not doing so early enough that any questions can be asked and answered before his nomination. Why delight critics, and irritate supporters, with a bout of stonewalling that's hardly worth the fight?

The Blog from the Core asserts Fair Use for non-commercial, non-profit educational purposes.

How sweet. More helpful advice from one branch (mainstream media) of the Democratic Establishment to another branch (the political party).

It'll probably work, too. One does have the feeling that the editors at the New York Times might have more influence over Teresa Heinz Kerry than John Heinz Forbes Kerry does.

Lane Core Jr. CIW P — Fri. 04/23/04 07:16:42 PM
Categorized as Democrats in Self-Destruct Mode & John Kerry & Media.

KERRY LIED!!!!!!!!!!

Democrats in Self-Destruct Mode CCLXVIII

Well, that's what would be said about this if conservatives reacted to the Kerry campaign the way liberals react to the Bush campaign (brackets in original).

Vietnam combat records posted on John F. Kerry's campaign website for the month of January 1969 as evidence of his service aboard swift boat No. 94 describe action that occurred before Kerry was skipper of that craft, according to the officer who said he commanded the boat at the time.

On the site, the Massachusetts senator is described as the skipper of Navy boat No. 94 during several actions in late January 1969.

However, Edward Peck, who was the skipper of the 94 before Kerry took over, said combat reports posted by the campaign for January 1969 involve action when he was the skipper, not Kerry. Peck, who was seriously wounded in fighting that took place on Jan. 29, 1969, said he believes Kerry campaign aides made a mistake in claiming Kerry as skipper of the 94 at that time.

On the Kerry website, the report of the combat on that day on the 94 boat is posted as occurring during Kerry's time as skipper of the boat. Peck said Kerry replaced him after the Jan. 29, 1969, event.

"Those are definitely mine," Peck said, referring to the combat reports that the Kerry campaign posted as representing Kerry's action. "There is no doubt about it."

A Kerry campaign spokesman, Michael Meehan, said in an e-mail that the campaign had obtained the combat reports for the 94 from the Navy. He did not directly address the question of why the campaign describes Kerry being skipper of the 94 at a time when Peck says he commanded the boat.

The reports at issue are in a 20-page batch representing Kerry's combat in January 1969. The reports include references to some dramatic action, including an ambush of Patrol Craft Fast, or PCF, 94. In addition to posting the information online, the campaign sent out an e-mail yesterday afternoon repeating the claim that Kerry was the skipper of the 94 boat throughout January and describing action the campaign said Kerry experienced while commanding the craft.

For example, in a summary of action that occurred Jan. 26, 1969, the campaign says Kerry served on boat No. 94 alongside another boat, No. 66. "PCFs 94 and 66 escorted troops up the Ong Doc River early in the morning when they were ambushed by gun and rocket fire from approximately 40 men on both sides of the river," the campaign summary says. "Two B-40 rounds hit close to Kerry's boat, while PCF 66 received 2 B-40 rocket hits. Three men on PCF66 were wounded. A junk containing South Vietnamese troops was also sunk, killing 11 South Vietnamese troops. Intelligence reports after the mission indicated that the Viet Cong troops may have planned the ambush in advance."

Peck said he was the skipper of the 94 at this time and that Kerry was not on the craft. While combat reports show several boats traveling with the 94, the campaign website says only that Kerry was the skipper of the 94 and does not try to place him on the other boats.

In another report, the campaign summarizes action that took place on Jan. 29, 1969, this way: "While Kerry's boat and another [PCF72] were probing a canal along the river, Kerry's boat came under heavy fire and was hit by a B-40 rocket in the cabin area. One member of Kerry's crew — Forward Gunner David Alston — suffered shrapnel wounds in his head. His injuries were not considered serious and he was sent to the 29th Evac Hospital at Binh Thuy."

Peck said he was the skipper on this day as well. Peck was also injured in the ambush and was hospitalized.

As a result, Kerry then took over the crew, Peck said. The Navy combat report posted by the Kerry campaign states that Peck and Alston were injured in the same event. There is no mention of Kerry in that report.

Kerry's commanding officer, George Elliott, said in a telephone interview that he vividly recalls Peck's injury and hospitalization and Kerry's replacement of Peck. "I think somebody made a mistake who doesn't know" the timing of Kerry's service, Elliott said. Kerry was skipper of boat No. 44 in December and January before taking over command of the 94, he said.

The Blog from the Core asserts Fair Use for non-commercial, non-profit educational purposes.

Whoa. Just imagine the mainstream-media feeding-frenzy that would result if the BG published a story with the headline Discrepancies noted in Bush's record.

So, which is it, Faithful Reader? Is the BG doing this because they really don't like Kerry? Or because they want to get this all out of the way as soon as they can?

The idea that they're just reporting the news is, of course, ridiculous.

Lane Core Jr. CIW P — Fri. 04/23/04 06:29:34 PM
Categorized as Democrats in Self-Destruct Mode & John Kerry & Media.

BC04

Democrats in Self-Destruct Mode CCLXXII

Howard Fineman 'splains it all very well (emphasis in original).

Sen. John Kerry's spin doctors claim that they haven't lost ground to George Bush in recent weeks, and they are staging what they insist is the "launch" of his general election campaign this week with new TV ads airing and a trip next week to the Midwest. But the fact is that Kerry has lost ground — ground he has to make up if he hopes to win in November. The more interesting question is why? My reasons:

• Richard Ben-Veniste & Co. The media loved the 9/11 commission hearings. By instinct, we thrilled to watch a prosecutor such as B-V on the hunt, creeping in on a witness like a big cat. But the commission, which served as a platform for the theatrical Richard Clarke and the cross-examinations of Democratic members, eventually came off as too political and partisan to damage the president. Just the opposite, I think. Too many of the commissioners ended up looking like they were pressing to prove that Bush could have and should have prevented the 9/11 catastrophe — a theory the public doesn’t buy. In fact, most Americans tend to blame the rise of terrorism here on the eight-year Clinton administration. Bush, without having to say much, was able to play the political victim.
• Fallujah and Najaf. Politics is a game of context. And for now, this early in the campaign, the context isn’t Bush versus Kerry — it’s Bush versus the murderers and thugs. The first reaction of Americans wasn’t “what were those contractors doing in Fallujah in the first place?” It was “we must punish the beasts who killed and savagely mutilated them.” As a political analyst, my first thought was: All this video is bad for Bush, because it makes his Iraq policy look like a failure. I was wrong, of course. His may pay politically for Iraq at some point, but not right now. For now, it’s still rally ’round the commander-in-chief, if for no other reason than to show that we are not Spain.
• “Resolve.” In politics, you can’t beat something with nothing. Bush has a plan and a vision: His goal is to protect the American homeland by spreading democracy (by military force if necessary) to the cockpit of Islamic fundamentalism. This idea strikes many serious people as naïve and grandiose at best, dangerously imperious and counter-productive at worst. But what, precisely, is the better idea? Kerry certainly hasn’t made that clear. “Winning hearts and minds” sounds nice, but how do you do that these days? Relying on the United Nations sounds good, too, except that the U.N. has little real credibility. Reinventing the CIA clearly is necessary, but it will take America years if not decades to approach the sophistication of the British — and even they are eyeless in Gaza. Polls show that voters still think it was a good idea to go to Iraq, though they think that by an ever-dwindling margin. But they probably won’t abandon that belief — or Bush — until they can clearly see an alternative answer. Indeed, in most important ways, Kerry seems to basically agree with Bush on the goals and current strategies in Iraq.
• Bob Woodward’s blessing. He certainly didn’t intend to do so, but the great Watergate reporter’s new book, “Plan of Attack,” gives President Bush some cover — which is why it’s listed on the Bush-Cheney ’04 Web site as recommended reading. No, Bush didn’t convene the war cabinet to assess the risks of going to Iraq. But Woodward portrays the president as insisting on the need to prove the case that Saddam Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction. According to Woodward, CIA Director George Tenet told Bush that making such a case would be a “slam dunk.” Stories about the president’s reliance on faith and on a “higher father” to give him strength scare many voters. But most of those particular voters lost to Bush long ago. On the other hand, I can think of swing voters I’ve interviewed in Ohio and Florida who would be reassured, not shocked, that Bush would pray as he leads.
• Tony & Trump. Let’s face it, as a people we tend to like simple answers and strong leaders who propound them. That may be especially true in these, the early years of what is likely to be a long, twilight struggle against terrorism. The “Sopranos” were popular before 9/11, but even more so now. In these parlous times, Tony Soprano is the king of cable, Donald Trump the king of broadcast TV. There is a full-speed-ahead, damn-the-consequences aura to them both. An oversimplification, for sure: I’m obviously not proposing moral equivalence between a mob boss and the estimable real estate developer. But this is a time, it seems, when we are enamored of harsh methods. “Bring it on!”
• Fifty million bucks worth of ads. The Bush campaign has been nothing if not methodical. They laid out their program in February, adapted it to Kerry late that month, and have been playing out the plan since: starting with “positives” about Bush and 9/11 (the controversial “firefighter” ad); then a series on taxes and the economy timed to the approach of Tax Day; now, since April 15, going at Kerry full bore for his vote against the $87 billion funding for the war. In the 18 or so battleground states, Bush-Cheney has been on the air big time. Competing spinners assess the magnitude of the results differently. Listening to both sides, I assess it this way: BC04 drove all of the Republicans away from Kerry in the battleground states, and back into the Bush fold. But BC04 probably still has a long way to go — all the way to Election Day — to get the swing voters who will decide the destiny of those states.
• The Economy. It is improving in most places in most ways. West Virginia is a good example. Bush won it in 2000 on the strength of protectionist promises made to steelworkers there. He has since dialed back on protection, and you would think that that presented a big opening to the Democrats there. But, for other reasons (voracious demand in China, mostly) the American steel industry is booming. There are other local and national trends out there. Some of that good news is getting out, which is why Bush’s numbers — still not great — are improving for handling the economy. And, as in Iraq, Kerry’s proposals aren’t radically different. He’s even in favor of keeping most of Bush’s tax cuts in place.
• Nader. I went to see him at a breakfast with reporters the other day, and expected to see a doddering fellow ready for the retirement home. Nothing could be further from the truth. Still sharp and energetic — and still possessed of his radar-like ability to hone in on the faults of the corporate/political establishment — Nader is a dagger pointed straight at the Kerry campaign. In the Washington Post poll, for example, he draws six points in a three-way match, compared with 48 for Bush and 44 for Kerry. Nader insists that he will draw equally from Democrats and Republicans; I don’t see it. And with Kerry taking a carefully modulated line on Iraq (made necessary by his $87 billion vote), Nader is free to be the Peace Candidate and the all-out anti Big Business candidate, too.
• Kerry, of course. John Kerry is durable, unflappable and determined. He works to be in the right place at the right time, and often is. He has no illusions about his own star power or charisma. He is a wooden campaigner, and his 20 years in the Senate have left him unable to see that bragging about legislative maneuvers is the last thing you want to do. Kerry explained to supporters recently that he’d voted for the $87 billion before he’d voted against it. In his mind, evidently, he was merely explaining (with a mordant sense of humor) how the Senate works. But now that line is the centerpiece of a BC04 attack ad. Kerry told financial supporters in New York the other week that his objective, for now, was to “preserve my acceptability.” That’s a pretty low standard — but one he won’t meet if that is his only goal. So far, his strategy has amounted mostly to: Vote for me, I’m not Bush. That’s not enough, especially if Kerry is seen by most voters the way the BC04 ad portrays him: as a flip-flopping manipulative insider.

Howard Fineman is Newsweek’s chief political correspondent and an NBC News analyst.

The Blog from the Core asserts Fair Use for non-commercial, non-profit educational purposes.

Lane Core Jr. CIW P — Fri. 04/23/04 05:54:36 PM
Categorized as Democrats in Self-Destruct Mode.

Memories. Pressed Between... What? Oh, I Forget....

John Kerry's campaign coughed up some more records, as the Boston Globe reports, yesterday:

Senator John F. Kerry, under pressure to make his military records public, yesterday released dozens of pages from his four years of service in the Navy, including evaluations that characterized him as an outstanding and aggressive officer.

One document said Kerry was "unofficially credited with 20 enemy killed in action" in December 1968 while he commanded a naval "swift boat" near Cambodia. Kerry's unit was involved in an ambush and fighting that broke out at the time of a shaky "Christmas truce."

But both of the commanding officers who signed that fitness report said in telephone interviews yesterday that they do not recall an event at that time in which 20 enemy were killed. Kerry himself has never publicly claimed to have killed such a high number of enemy combatants. Campaign spokesman Michael Meehan said, "Senator Kerry recalls killing one enemy face to face. He does not dispute the fitness reports. He was the skipper of a craft that killed many enemy." The one enemy Kerry recalled killing was the Viet Cong that he killed in a separate event for which he received the Silver Star....

John Kerry: murdering! pillaging! soldier of fortune!

Oops. Sorry. He's a liberal, so he gets a pass.

Anyway, the article concludes with some really interesting quotations:

.... After leaving that division, Kerry went on to command six-man swift boats. One of the evaluations from that period says that Kerry, in an event during what was supposed to be Christmas truce, "effectively suppressed enemy fire and is unofficially credited with 20 enemy killed in action." The report was signed by two of Kerry's commanders: George Elliott and Joseph Streuli. But both said in telephone interviews yesterday that they did not recall the fighting.

"That number is so high I just don't recall anyone coming back and saying we got 20 of the enemy," Elliott said, adding that the timing of the fighting meant it would have happened when Streuli oversaw Kerry. Streuli, however, said, "I just don't remember it."

One of Kerry's crewmates, Steven Michael Gardner, said he remembers the firefight but does not recall 20 enemy killed. He said the crew would not have been able to verify the deaths.

Kerry, in interviews with the Globe, has not claimed to have been responsible for 20 enemy dead. The Globe has previously described the event, quoting a Kerry crewmate who said the crewmate had killed an old man in the crossfire and citing reports that two South Vietnamese allies were wounded or killed and a machine-gun nest manned by a dozen Viet Cong was silenced. Kerry provided the Globe last year with a lengthy diary entry about the event. It describes the firefight, but it does not mention 20 enemy being killed.

I just don't remember it. In case you don't remember, Faithful Reader, very similar statements sparked the mainstream-media feeding-frenzy — four years later! — about George W. Bush's ANG service in Alabama:

.... Finally, on Sept. 5, 1972, Bush requested permission to do duty for September, October, and November at the 187th Tactical Recon Group in Montgomery. Permission was granted, and Bush was directed to report to Turnipseed, the unit's commander.

In interviews last week, [retired Brig. Gen. William] Turnipseed and his administrative officer at the time, Kenneth K. Lott, said they had no memory of Bush ever reporting.

"Had he reported in, I would have had some recall, and I do not," Turnipseed said. "I had been in Texas, done my flight training there. If we had had a first lieutenant from Texas, I would have remembered." ....

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution put a little perspective on the issue, Feb. 13:

.... But the general's own memory apparently isn't so sound. In 2000, Turnipseed told The Boston Globe that he would have remembered Bush had he reported for duty — and that he didn't recall seeing the young pilot.

On Friday, he said, "I don't even remember if I was there."

"All I was trying to do is tell the truth about it. I'm beginning to find out my memory is not any good anymore. I'm 75 years old and getting Alzheimer's," Turnipseed said....

Lane Core Jr. CIW P — Fri. 04/23/04 07:57:00 AM
Categorized as Media.

Friends of Saddam

A young weblog.

Vide.

Lane Core Jr. CIW P — Fri. 04/23/04 07:19:23 AM
Categorized as Other.