SEPTEMBER 29, 2004

A STUPID IDEA AND FRANZI'S RESPONSE

Dear Inside Track Online,

You know how city governments often sponsor gun buy-backs to reduce urban gun violence?

World Ahead Publishing recently announced that it will be sponsoring a Fahrenheit 9/11 buy-back program starting Oct. 5th, the day Michael Moore's documentary becomes available to home viewers. (Complete release below.)

This buy-back program was just featured in USA Today and many other papers across the country. The GOP recently declared our book, THANK YOU, PRESIDENT BUSH, to be "required Republican reading." We've been featured in the New York Times, Los Angeles and many others.

Call me and I'll set up interviews with the editors and publisher. 

Regards,

Steven

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

CONTACT: Steven Phenix

The Alliant Group

(512) 585-7913

phenix@thealliantgroup.com

PUBLISHER SPONSORING "DVD BUY-BACK" PROGRAM TO KEEP AMERICAN HOMES SAFE FROM MICHAEL MOORE'S DANGEROUS PROPAGANDA 

Similar to Gun Buy-Backs, World Ahead Publishing Exchanges "Fahrenheit 9/11" for Copies of THANK YOU, PRESIDENT BUSH

LOS ANGELES, September 17, 2004 - In an effort to ensure the safety of American homes, World Ahead Publishing, publisher of THANK YOU, PRESIDENT BUSH, announces its Fahrenheit 9/11 DVD Buy-Back program for U.S. purchasers of Michael Moore's documentary. In urban areas, city leaders periodically sponsor gun "buy-back" programs to help reduce gun violence. Similarly, the Fahrenheit 9/11 DVD Buy-Back program is designed to protect Americans from harm, especially young children who might accidentally slip this dangerous propaganda into the living room DVD player. 

Beginning October 5th, the day Moore's documentary goes on sale, World Ahead Publishing will offer citizens the opportunity to exchange their copies of Fahrenheit 9/11 for THANK YOU PRESIDENT BUSH: REFLECTIONS ON THE WAR ON TERROR, DEFENSE OF THE FAMILY, AND THE REVIVAL OF THE ECONOMY, with no questions asked. 

Unlike Moore's film, which deceptively splices film footage to score its points, Thank You, President Bush discusses the facts. This book's all-star list of contributors includes Art Laffer, the father of supply-side economics; George Shultz, former Secretary of State; James Dobson, founder of Focus on the Family; and Bill Bennett, former Secretary of Education. Vice President Dick Cheney also contributes a chapter on foreign policy, and the President's brother, Gov. Jeb Bush, pens a moving and personal introduction. All 29 writers are experts in their topics, addressing such important issues as national security, the economy, and social policy in straightforward language.

"Moore's work isn't a documentary. It's a dangerous weapon that shouldn't be left lying around the house," says Aman Verjee, co-editor of the anthology. "Send us Moore's lies and we'll give you the truth on President Bush's record and policies. We want to give people who unsuspectingly buy Moore's propaganda a chance to trade it in for a book that's positive and insightful," added Verjee. "This book sets the record straight: George W. Bush deserves more than another term in office; he deserves our gratitude."

FRANZI'S RESPONSE:

First, let me make one point overwhelmingly clear. I consider Michael Moore treasonous scum.

As to your idea. Let's see if got this straight. You promote the distribution of a pro-Bush book by offering it in trade for a copy of the Moore F9/11 video, likening the process to the gun buyback program promoted by various dumb shit liberals running city governments around the country and likening the DVD to guns as a dangerous object to have around the house.

I will be happy to feature this item on next weekends INSIDE TRACK and our website
insidetrackaz.com. Under the heading "ANOTHER DUMB IDEA THAT'S TIME HAS COME."

First problem. Gun buybacks suck and never work. All you ever collect is junk, stolen cheap stuff used in crimes, and an occasional antique from some guilt-tripped widow.
They ain't exactly a role model for those on the freedom side of the fence.

Second problem. You're analogizing guns - something with genuine value - to Moore's DVD, something of negative value. In doing so you legitimize the gun buyback process.

Third problem. Other than some shills who will help fill Moore's pockets some more, do you REALLY think anybody dumb enough to pay for that DVD will trade it in a for a Bush book? Few if any will, embarassing the Bush campaign when the liberal media hacks push you for the numbers, assuming they pay any attention at all.

Dumb idea folks, Dumb dumb dumb.

EMIL FRANZI

SEPTEMBER 19, 2004

CITY COUNCIL MEMBER FRED RONSTADT'S WARD WEEKLY

Thanks to everyone who attended the Water Forum last night and those who sent their comments by email. I am still working through all the emails we received, but there seems to be a very clear message*This is a vital issue for the future of our community that needs to be addressed now.

While the "Water Wars" of the 1990's are over, we still have to confront today's "Water Challenges."

Last night David Modeer presented some stark facts about our water supply and the challenges we have to face. The simple facts are these:
* We live in the desert where water is a finite resource;
* We are experiencing a drought of record that some experts believe could be 25 years long;
* Projections of growth in the West made in the 1980's were significantly underestimated;
* Our fixed allocation of Colorado River water will not be able to meet future demands;
* Arizona's supply of Colorado River water is not assured;
* We cannot pump more water out of the ground than is being replaced by Mother Nature;
* We have to create a comprehensive water policy to ensure our community has a reliable supply of water;
* Doing nothing is not an option.

As I wrote before, I am using the comments from last night's forum and your continuous flow of email to help me focus my policy decisions. Here are some of the comments and questions we heard last night:
* As the Colorado River's volume decreases, what are the options?
* When you live in the desert you should "pay through the nose" for water.
* Where do new developments get water if it is not provided by Tucson Water?
* We need community wide planning.
* This is a tough situation that needs to be handled delicately.
* We heard reality tonight.
* Is Tucson Water working on any desalinization projects?
* 40% of water goes to outdoor uses. We need to reduce this or replace the drinking water with reclaimed water.
* Annexation allows us to enforce conservation policies, gives people living outside the city a voice in water policy and promotes intelligent, long-range planning.

Tucson Water is in the process of developing a long-range water plan, which David said would be ready in about two months. However, at this point the council is being forced into a vote on September 27th that will directly impact the city's ability to provide a clean, safe and adequate supply of water for our future. This is what created the immediate need for last night's forum. As I mentioned yesterday, I am hopeful that vote will be postponed so we can have more community dialogue and allow David Modeer and the skilled professionals of Tucson Water to complete the long-range plan.

From the responses at the forum and the emails I have read so far, I know there are a lot of folks who are as passionate about this issue as me. This issue comes down to simply protecting our environment, conserving an extremely limited resource and ensuring the future success of our unique desert community.

We are truly blessed to live here and to have professionals like David Modeer working for all of us. I would be negligent if I did not also mention the other water asset we have working for us*Council Member Carol West. During my time in office I have continually relied on her vast knowledge and experience with this issue. I know she is working as hard as a lot of us to make sure we have the right policies in place for our community.

Many of you have commented on how you appreciate the short length of these weekly reports. I want to let you know that as this issue matures the reports may be a little longer. I hope you understand the nature of this issue and the fact that I what to help get the best and freshest information possible to you so you can then make well informed comments in this forum makes this necessary.

Please continue providing your comments on this issue and I'll talk with you next week!

Best regards,
Fred Ronstadt
Vice-Mayor

Would you like to be added to the Ward VI Weekly Email List? Please e-mail ward6@tucsonaz.gov with "Add to Mail list" in the subject line.

I want you to know that I read every response. Though I am not able to respond to every single one, I am giving each comment careful consideration.

Forwarded by Bruce Ash:

AUGUST 11, 2004

FLAG BURNING; GAY MARRIAGE

Obviously after 30 years in the military I have strong feelings for the flag and America

....but surprisingly I am against the proposed Constitutional Amendment

Why ?  Because instead of stopping "flag burning" it will increase it.

A Constitutional Amendment or even just a general law prohibiting desecration of the flag will have to have a penalty..... that penalty will not be severe enough to over ride the demonstrators desire for publicity....in fact it makes it MORE attractive.

You cannot legislate patriotism. The best way to stop flag desecration is to stop putting it on the front page or on TV. Once burning the flag stops giving them access to the media they will be forced to find some other way to shock and disrupt

As to the "marriage " amendment, while I do not think it is appropriate to sanctify an unconventional lifestyle, I also do not think calling those unions a "marriage" actually threatens the heterosexual world and the sanctity of normal marriage.

There are legal aspects of gay relationships that need addressing ( such as hospital access and inheritance ), but I would think the gay community would not be inclined to subject themselves to the the legal complications of a "real' marriage. I think they want recognition and approval from the public and have not fully thought out the ramifications of their position. Legalizing gay marriage will only make one group "truly  happy".....LAWYERS .


JAMES " KOJAK " HUGHS

JULY 24, 2004

AIN'T IT AMAZING?

JULY 20, 2004

LORD HAW-HAW VERSUS MICHAEL MOORE

Wasn't Lord Haw-Haw executed by Britain after WWII for treason for 
broadcasting Nazi propaganda from Germany?

If I have it right I think you are lucky your critics are generally 
uninformed and not paying attention. Otherwise they would take you to task 
on the obvious distinctions.

Phil Murphy also takes the approach that he won't spend money to support 
"the enemy." I do respect that. It is not too strong to say that Michael 
Moore gives aid and comfort to the enemies of the United States (in a 
general not is a legal sense.) Nor is it too strong to say that Michael 
Moore is himself an enemy of the United States.

Contributing my widow's mite to the cause that personal freedom not be lost 
from America in my lifetime, I remind myself of the example of the 
Athenians who tolerated both Aristophanes and General Thucydides during the 
Peloponesian War. (Nor do I need to be reminded that the Athenians lost.)

Personally, I find living a perpetual boycott too much effort. And as a 
matter of principle it consider it a profoundly anti-market stance. Not 
that markets are above criticism:. the price of everything and the value of 
nothing, and all that. But they are the single human institution yet 
evolved which can bring order to human activity over a broad scope without 
resorting to coercion.

I wouldn't change you if I could. Best wishes. I think often of taking you 
up on that lunch sometime. But, not soon, alas.

BTW how about Dave Hardy as a guest on That Big, Fat, Stupid White Man?

toodles
Bob Bushkin

I made the distinction between LEGAL and MORAL. Minus a real declaration of war, he gets to run off at the mouth all he wants.

And I get to call him a treasonous scum for doing so. And it ain't for lying about the Prez. It's for trashing America and Americans in general in foreign countries for fun and profit. In a free country you can do that all day long, as putrid as it is.

The moral difference between Moore and Lord Haw Haw is much smaller than the legal.

And I'm chasing Hardy this week for a guest shot.

EF

CONCERNED ABOUT AMERICAN INTELLIGENCE - IN BOTH MEANINGS

I am concerned for America. This Congressional Intelligence Committee report rakes the intelligence community and indirectly the administration, over the coals. They after-the-fact "Armchair General" all the decisions and determined we were hasty and ill informed based on flawed intelligence. While the officially report states there was no "pressure" to tailor the information to support the invasion of Iraq the Democrats issued an addendum stating "there was pressure". I hasten to add this addendum has no factual support. BUT  It is hard to imagine there was no "pressure". That pressure was not necessarily from the administration but 9/11 ALONE was pressure for the Intelligence community to error on the side of caution.

The fact that Congress has under-funded the CIA and other intelligence agencies for years escaped was under reported. The fact that because of these fund cuts we had no "feet on the ground" in these areas of potential threat. ( ....and still don't) The fact that we had to rely on second hand information from people with dubious motives was bound to taint the intelligence.

Most people are concerned about what all this "Monday Quarterback-ing" will effect George Bush's election. I am MORE concerned for the damage it is doing to the intelligence community. Will future intelligence analysis's error on the side of caution. Will they fail to report information until they can PROVE it. Intelligence is a guessing game based on scraps of information. Often there is no "proof" and never will be until it is too late. Look what happened before 9/11. We ignored  scraps of information which might have prevented the Twin Tower Attack. Now we are creating a climate where more "scraps of information" will be ignored.

Like "Political Correctness" which keeps us checking little old grandmothers and Medal of Honor winners rather than "profiling" a potential criminal. This new unrealistic intelligence criteria could facilitate and support a second attack against America.  Should we analyze our mistakes.....of course.... Should we correct our errors.....of course.....but should we kick the information around like a political football.....a resounding " NO !! "  

JAMES " KOJAK " HUGHS

I am pleased to say that I mostly agree with Mr. Hughs, who is one of our most eloquent contributors.  While I confess that I share the hope with others on both the right and left that this information contributes to Bush's defeat, I certainly concede that the electoral consequence is secondary and the implications for national security primary.  One ray of hope:  one-fifth of the report was censored by the Administration and has never seen the light of day.  Additionally, the Committee agreed to defer any examination into Bush's role until after the election.  Which means that the truth may eventually come out regarding the extent, if any, of White House pressure to cook the intelligence books in favor of the Iraqi invasion.

Regarding the aforementioned delay:  I am certain that Mr. Hughs would agree with me that deferring the investigation into the role of the President amounts to placing electoral considerations ahead of national security.  The Committee members should be ashamed of themselves.

-Mike Tully