Wednesday, October 20, 2010

The Gazette on Martha Schaerr's Stealth Candidacy

The Gazette this morning reported on the stealth candidacy of Martha Schaerr, Director of the Family Leader Network, a group that sued the Montgomery County Public Schools to keep information about sexual orientation out of the sex-ed curriculum. Now that she is running for county school board, Ms. Schaerr makes no mention of her position in the Family Leader Network in any campaign materials, nor any mention that she is the president of the Citizens for Traditional Families, another anti-gay group.
A Montgomery County Board of Education candidate has vowed that she won't revive a past legal tussle with county schools over the sex education curriculum.

Martha Schaerr, who is running to represent District 5 on the school board against incumbent member Michael A. Durso, downplayed her involvement with a group that in 2007 tried to stop two lessons dealing with homosexuality from being taught in Montgomery County Public Schools sex education classes.

Schaerr, a Derwood resident, said her involvement with the Family Leader Network against the classes in eighth and 10th grade won't matter if she wins the Nov. 2 election. The other board members won't support efforts to change the curriculum, Schaerr said, making any action on her part pointless.

"Why would I go back to things where I know nobody's going to agree with me?" said Schaerr, a Derwood resident, who acknowledged that stressing the issue would hurt her candidacy. No fight over sex education, Montgomery County school board candidate promises: Schaerr says she won't raise the issue of homosexual education despite past legal action

Schaerr's group sued MCPS in the courts to block pilot-testing of the new curriculum, then went to the state school board to block implementation of it. Now she says she knows it's an unpopular cause, and she won't pursue it any further.

I agree, "stressing the issue would hurt her candidacy," and ignoring the issue will hurt her candidacy, too. She apparently thinks that her past should evaporate, that her anti-LGBT activism should not be count when she runs for office.

Skipping down ...
Jane deWinter, president of the Montgomery County Council of Parent-Teacher Associations from 2006 to 2008, said she did not recall Schaerr being publicly active in the legal complaints, although she noted that her organization did not involve itself in the process.

The fact that the groups took action because of strong personal beliefs merits attention, even if lawsuits against the school are common, she said.

"I think that when people are voting for anyone for any office, they need to look at the totality of what they believe in," deWinter said.

Durso agreed with Schaerr that sex education is not a "hot topic" on the school board. During his tenure as principal of Silver Spring's Springbrook High School, Durso recalled, there was a group of straight and gay students that met as an after-school club to discuss relevant issues.

"I think what's interesting is that over the years in my experiences, students have probably been far more tolerant of some of these issues than their parents and other adults," Durso said.

Ms. Schaerr did keep a low personal profile in the lawsuits, but her organization was active in fighting the school district to prevent the teaching of information about sexual orientation and gender identity. There is no reason to believe that she has lost interest in the topic, or that she will not undermine the county's progress on this matter if she is elected to the school board.

Jews on First (motto: "defending the First Amendment against the Christian right ... because if Jews don't speak out, they'll think we don't mind") has posted a short video containing excerpts of an interview with Martha Schaerr HERE.

In that video, you watch Ms. Schaerr carefully consider her words. She knows she is expected to answer the question about sex ed, as all the other candidates did, but she knows that her fringe views will certainly lose her votes, as she notes in the Gazette story. Listen and decide for yourself, is this really a topic she will put behind her?

Ms. Schaerr was the point person for the Family Leader Network's project to monitor school boards for evidence that they "promote the normalcy of homosexuality and 'comprehensive' sex education, [and] are aggressively pushing their agenda into schools under the banners of tolerance, equality and safety." She leads an organization that advocates in the courts against the rights of LGBT Americans, and she is on the board of directors of an organization that has repeatedly sued our county's school district to keep "tolerance, equality, and safety" out of the curriculum.

Do you think that if she is elected she will really leave all that behind her? Do you think she will be fair to LGBT students and other minorities?

23 Comments:

Anonymous slumdog said...

(Oct. 20) -- President Barack Obama may skip a planned visit to the Golden Temple in Amritsar on his trip to India next month because wearing the required head cover in the religious space could make him look like a Muslim.

The Golden Temple in Punjab is the holiest site for people of the Sikh faith. Sikh men, who keep their unshorn hair in turbans and have long beards, are often mistaken for Muslims in the West, and Indian media are reporting that the White House is concerned that Obama would appear more Muslim if he has to don a headscarf, as non-Sikh men generally do when entering the shrine.

Many Americans believe that Obama is a covert Muslim. Last month, a Time magazine poll found that 24 percent believe the president is a Muslim.

October 20, 2010 1:27 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Ms. Schaerr makes no mention of her position in the Family Leader Network in any campaign materials, nor any mention that she is the president of the Citizens for Traditional Families, another anti-gay group."

unless voters are clamoring for such information, why should she?

believe or not, for most non-fringers, the gay agenda is not a make or break issue

"downplayed her involvement with a group that in 2007 tried to stop two lessons dealing with homosexuality from being taught"

well, I'm glad you brought it to my attention

I'm telling everyone I know to vote for her

I don't think many Dems are planning to vote

as for teachers' unions, they have the day off and will sleep in, then go shoppin'!

"and ignoring the issue will hurt her candidacy"

I doubt it

being on the other side didn't help the Duchy and Dana show

"her anti-LGBT activism should not be count when she runs for office"

I don't think she is against Ls, Gs, Bs or Ts. She's just against the gay agenda. So are a whole bunch of gays.

btw, President Obama opposes gay marriage and wants to restore DADT

would you vote him onto the MCPS Board?

"Durso agreed with Schaerr that sex education is not a "hot topic" on the school board"

at least someone hasn't lost touch with reality

"There is no reason to believe that she has lost interest in the topic, or that she will not undermine the county's progress on this matter if she is elected to the school board"

I agree and I don't think anyone in MC cares (except for a few stray TTFers)

it'll be funny reading TTF the day after she wins

"Ms. Schaerr was the point person for the Family Leader Network's project to monitor school boards for evidence that they "promote the normalcy of homosexuality and 'comprehensive' sex education, [and] are aggressively pushing their agenda into schools under the banners of tolerance, equality and safety.""

cool, that makes this position on the school board a perfect fit for her

"She leads an organization that advocates in the courts against the rights of LGBT Americans,"

ho, hum

gays have all the same rights the rest of us have

there is no right to have a school curriculum advocate for you

"and she is on the board of directors of an organization that has repeatedly sued our county's school district to keep "tolerance, equality, and safety" out of the curriculum"

actually, that's not what the suits were about

"Do you think that if she is elected she will really leave all that behind her?"

nope

"Do you think she will be fair to LGBT students"

yep

"and other minorities?"

sounds like another allegation by TTF

any evidence to back it up?

October 20, 2010 1:58 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Barry in action, again, today:

"WASHINGTON -The Obama administration on Wednesday asked a federal appeals court to immediately suspend a judge's ruling that overturned the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy on gays.

Obama says he wants the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit in San Francisco to take action on Wednesday. The federal government is preparing arguments for the appeals court on why the ruling on "don't ask, don't tell" should be suspended while the case is appealed.

Obama says that letting the ruling of U.S. District Judge Virginia Phillips go forward immediately would be a major problem for the military.

Leaving the judge's decision in place now "would create tremendous uncertainty," Obama's Justice Department said in its latest appeals court filing.

"Effectively developing proper training and guidance with respect to a change in policy will take much time and effort," the court papers added."

sounds like Obama is on to something

maybe ending DADT is not as simple as it sounds

it may takes years, if ever, for such a thing to be accomplished

maybe he'll appoint Martha Schaerr to a post in the Education Department

assuming Sharron Angle can't talk her fellow Senators into abolishing it

October 20, 2010 2:38 PM  
Anonymous let's think about this.. said...

"the stealth candidacy of Martha Schaerr"

so, you think that anyone who opposed the homosexual advocacy part of the sex ed curriculum should forever place a warning label on any campaign literature they produce?

why just gay issues?

why not all the issues they ever worked on?

otherwise, you'll be giving gays special attention and rights again

you think Schaerr is a stealth candidate because she doesn't highlight this?

do you think Dana was a stealth candidate because Dana didn't highlight Dana's unethical activities in interferring with the petition drive or Dana's gender history or Dana's lawsuit against Montgomery County?

or is it only those who oppose the gay agenda who can be stealthy?

October 20, 2010 4:12 PM  
Anonymous yuk it up, funny guy! said...

Barry apparently thinks this is all some kind of joke

after having a comedian come make mock testimony on Capitol Hill when Congress couldn't even find time to pass a budget or determine next year's tax rates, the Democrats now send the President to Comedy Central mere days before the American people decide which party is best equipped to deal with our ailing economy

think I'll vote for the party that takes the whole seriously:

"President Obama will appear on "The Daily Show" with John Stewart on Oct. 27.

The appearance on the Comedy Central program will be Obama's first since being elected president. Vice President Joe Biden appeared on the show in November 2009.

The commander in chief's appearance is intended to boost enthusiasm among young voters -- who were a considerable part of Obama's base in 2008, but who traditionally stay at home during the midterms."

Barry, they might get a laugh but it won't get them off the couch and to the polling place

meantime, everyone else thinks you're a jackass (in 3D)

"Obama's appearance will occur less than a week before election day, and three days before Stewart's rally to "Restore Sanity" on the National Mall."

The event is planned as a response to conservative pundit Glenn Beck's "Restoring Honor" rally."

so Americans get a clear choice between sarcasm and inspiration

thanks, Jon

"Of late, the president has been making a concerted effort to kiss up to the 18-29-year-old voting group, dubbed "millennials." Beginning with a campaign-style rally at the University of Wisconsin last month, he has since held a town hall meeting with students at George Washington University, another town hall sponsored by the youth-focused MTV networks, and a large campaign-style event at Ohio State University last weekend.

The impact of the president's efforts is unclear -- and will remain so until Nov. 3."

what's unclear about a 42% approval rating?

seems pretty clear to me

October 20, 2010 6:51 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Anon's fear and hatred of gays is evident, but it has nothing to do with the secret Martha Schaerr is keeping.

Schaerr took part in multiple costly frivolous lawsuits against the very body she is seeking to be elected to sit on, the MCPS Board of Education. Rather than being honest and admitting what she has done, she has chosen to be dishonest and not disclose her part in those lawsuits.

Martha Schaerr is lying by omission to the voters of Montgomery County, Maryland, which makes her a stealth candidate.

October 20, 2010 9:58 PM  
Anonymous shameless and blameless said...

"Anon's fear and hatred of gays is evident,"

oh yeah, gays are right up there with vampires and mummies when it comes to the fear factor

but scary is sometimes fun

ask any fool

Halloween is cooool!

I don't hate gays at all, I hope they get straightened out which would be great for them

I wish them well

"but it has nothing to do with the secret Martha Schaerr is keeping"

she's not keeping any secrets

she's shrewdly refusing to let the lunatic fringe define her agenda

to sum up:

Schaerr: shrewd

TTF: crude

"Schaerr took part in multiple costly"

they cost a lot less than Dana's lawsuit against MC will

I don't hear any complaint from TTF about that

"frivolous"

I think it's a stretch to call the suits frivolous when the plaintiffs prevailed in one of them

"lawsuits against the very body she is seeking to be elected to sit on, the MCPS Board of Education."

if only people that agree with the school board can run for a seat on it, that would be the North Korean model

say, you aren't a socialist, are you?

"Rather than being honest and admitting what she has done, she has chosen to be dishonest and not disclose her part in those lawsuits."

Are you still talking about Schaerr or have you moved on to Dana now?

It's getting a little confusing

"Martha Schaerr is lying by omission to the voters of Montgomery County, Maryland, which makes her a stealth candidate."

oh, OK, back to Schaerr

well, you could say the same about any candidate

candidates can't say everything and the whole sex ed thing is something that no one cares about

so candidates are better to address what voters are concerned with

Dana Beyer is a good example

Dana ran for the state legislature and omitted that Dana was cited for ethics violations for Dana's actions in the county council and that Dana was counter-suing the ethics board in retaliation

Dana also omitted that Dana was formerly an officer of the lunatic fringe group, TTF

who can blame Dana for that?

October 21, 2010 12:11 AM  
Anonymous Aunt Bea said...

"lawsuits against the very body she is seeking to be elected to sit on, the MCPS Board of Education."

if only people that agree with the school board can run for a seat on it, that would be the North Korean model

say, you aren't a socialist, are you?


If Schaerr disagrees with the Board on this issue she sued MCPS over multiple times, why is she hiding that disagreement from MoCo voters and pretending she agrees, like this socialist North Korean model you brought up?

Are you still talking about Schaerr or have you moved on to Dana now?

It's getting a little confusing


Vigilance readers well know reading comprehension has long been your short suit and personal attacks against Dana in particular have been one of your favorite activities at Vigilance. Way to combine them, S&B!

The fact is Dana is not mentioned in the comment you've responded to so any confusion is inside your head.

the whole sex ed thing is something that no one cares about

Right!

< eye roll >

The CRC, PFOX, and Martha Schaerr's Family Leader Network cared so little about the MCPS sex ed curriculum that they sued and sued and sued over it.

BTW, what did the suers use their 10-day TRO "win" in 2005 to bargain for? They got MCPS to reduce community input to the CACFLHD from 27 to 15 members and one court ordered seat each for PFOX and CRC on that committee, in the attempt to make their small numbers in the community more potent on the committee.

October 21, 2010 8:38 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Anonymous"
Your constant harping on TTF as the "lunatic fringe group" is amusing. And which lunatic fringe group do you represent by your odious presence here? Identify the 8-9 (if that many) followers of your group for a change...instead of hiding behind your repugnant "Anonymosity" every time you post your drivel here (although I do think your current i.d. - "Shameless" is not only hystericall funny, but pretty apt.)

Which national "Family Values" (sic) group pays for the endless times you bloviate here?

AS has been stated here many times before, you seem to be very familiar with the "gay agenda" (sic). Perhaps you could cite specific passages of that "agenda" for us...or at the very least cite a source that can verify your reference to it (and quotes from the American Family Coalition, et al. do not count).

"I don't hate gays at all, I hope they get straightened out which would be great for them".

And my hope for you is that you can get yourself "gayified" wich could improve your sour disposition and, no doubt, be an antidote for your hatred and bigotry. If not that...at least some reading of your Bible and following the teachings of your Lord could ameliorate your problem.
Diogenes

October 21, 2010 10:46 AM  
Anonymous go go B. O. !! said...

President Obama wins a round:

"Barack Obama won a stay against the moratorium on "don't ask, don't tell" Wednesday, granting the Pentagon the right to once again ban gays from serving openly in the military.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit issued the decision, giving itself time to consider Obama's appeal of last week's injunction by a U.S. District judge.

Wednesday's stay was the latest volley in an issue ping-ponging through the courts as the Obama administration tries to stop a Republican group from winning rights for gays.

The Republicans that brought the suit challenging the constitutionality of "don't ask, don't tell," have until Monday to appeal the stay.

"While we are disappointed, we view the decision as nothing more than a minor setback," said the attorney representing the Republicans. "We didn't come this far to quit now."

"For the reasons stated in the government's submission, we believe a stay is appropriate," Pentagon spokeswoman Cynthia Smith said. It will be issuing additional guidance regarding a renewed ban on gays, she said.

The military is back to where it was before the court caught it by surprise last Tuesday with it's injunction. Since then, the Pentagon has instructed recruiters to accept openly gay applicants.

As for any gay or lesbian people who enlisted this week, "They will be told they cannot join."

"Look what happened last week: The military suspended "don't ask, don't tell" with no training, and guess what? Nothing happened," Aaron Belkin of a gay think tank at UC Santa Barbara, said.

Elaine Donnelly of the Center for Military Readiness disagreed, saying that allowing recruiters to accept gay recruits created confusion. "Why would they tell recruiters that they should do something that has never been done in the history of the U.S. military?" Donnelly said. "There is no excuse for that."

Obama had asked the 9th Circuit to lift Phillips's injunction, stating that the injunction "is at odds with basic principles of judicial restraint" because it blocks the Pentagon from enforcing the gay ban across the military and not just on gay Republicans.

The Republicans dismissed Obama's argument, saying the Pentagon "has already acted nimbly" in response to the injunction by ordering recruiters to accept gay and lesbian applicants.

"The fact that the government can and did issue such instructions and complied with the injunction immediately shows that the military will not sustain irreparable harm from compliance and belies the need for any temporary stay," the Republicans argued in court papers.

"We're a little surprised that Obama's making the same old argument again," Log Cabin Executive Director R. Clarke Cooper said. "One has to wonder what the tack here is. Is it that he thinks they have another shot at making the same arguments again?"

Cooper and other gay rights advocates once again cautioned gays not to discuss their sexuality with recruiters because Obama's actions make for an uncertain future."

October 21, 2010 1:47 PM  
Anonymous I feel a chill.. said...

Climategate II is upon us

Wikipedia has finally banned several administrators and dispute arbitrators that have been deleting and skewing articles to support global warming propaganda over the last few years

I know how disgusted TTF is with that kind of filthy distortion of science so I'm sure you guys will want to cheer Wiki on!

October 21, 2010 2:51 PM  
Anonymous Aunt Bea said...

The distortions Vigilance readers are concerned with on this thread are those being foisted by Martha Schaerr on Montgomery County voters. Why can't she be honest with these voters and tell them why she felt is was important to join CRC/PFOX's lawsuit against MCPS to stop the implementation of a curriculum that teaches respect, tolerance, and empathy?

She could stand to study those lessons herself. Maybe then she'd learn to show some respect for the voters she's asking to vote for her by being honest with them.

As far as global warming goes:

NOAA reports 2010 hottest year on record so far*
Zambia hits 108.3°F, 18th nation to set record high this year

October 21, 2010 3:54 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

well, Jim did not post my comment on this today

Schaerr is no different than Dana on highlighting past activities

she rightly perceived this to not be something the voters are concerned with

I assume Dana did the same with her situation

"Why can't she be honest with these voters"

there is not one instance of her being dishonest

"and tell them why she felt is was important to join CRC/PFOX's lawsuit against MCPS"

other than you guys here, there has been no request from voters for this

you could try to instigate a clamor among voters to discuss this but I doubt you'd succeed

no one wants to rehash this so why should she irritate voters on your behalf?

"to stop the implementation of a curriculum that teaches respect, tolerance, and empathy?"

that's your characterization of the curriculum and a matter of opinion

"She could stand to study those lessons herself."

again, a matter of opinion

"Maybe then she'd learn to show some respect for the voters she's asking to vote for her by being honest with them."

well, the voters can decide that for themselves but I don't think they feel dissed and I don't think you'll be able to convince them they have been

the voters don't want to address it and TTF is the one that apparently won't respect their wishes

that's nothing new

on the issues TTF concerns itself with, it has consistently held that they are issues that are told elemental to be subject to democratic forces

"As far as global warming goes:"

yes, as far it goes, the relevant issue is not so much whether it occurs but whether the researchers who advocate the theory that it is caused by human activity have a respect for the integrity of the data and, if they don't, which appears to be the case, why not?

October 21, 2010 5:13 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

(Oct. 21) -- In the course of one day, Lt. Dan Choi, a gay Iraq war veteran, has gone from ecstatic to devastated.

On Wednesday, he gleefully announced he'd begun the process of re-enlisting in the Army because the controversial "don't ask, don't tell" policy had been suspended. Today, he was back where he started after the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco granted Barack Obama's request to freeze the suspension.

"President Obama is playing politics. There's no reason you should force people to lie to serve their country," Choi said today.

Justice Department lawyers filed an emergency appeal Wednesday with the 9th Circuit Court to stop the military from allowing openly gay troops to serve, putting itself in an odd position.

Choi, a 29-year-old Arab-language specialist who served three tours in Iraq, began his re-enlistment process at a New York City Times Square enlistment office Wednesday, one day after the Pentagon told recruiters to start accepting applications from openly gay people.

"When I went in to sign back up, it was an ecstatic day," Choi said. "When I heard (last) night" about the appeal, "that was very devastating.There's a midterm election happening in a few days, and President Obama is playing politics."

The president and first lady Michelle Obama have been on a whirlwind tour in the past few days, stumping for Democratic candidates in the Nov. 2 election, which has been overshadowed by conservative tea party politicians and general dissatisfaction with the troubled economy and high unemployment.

Obama says he appealed the ruling of California District Court Judge Virginia Phillips because lifting the ban would cause mass confusion among troops and disrupt government policy.

In court papers, Justice Department lawyers urged the appellate court to lift the ban on "don't ask, don't tell" because it would cause the government "irreparable injury," ABC News reported.

Choi, a West Point graduate who majored in Arabic studies, was honorably discharged last year, months after he announced he was gay on MSNBC. He said today that he served without incident after he came out.

"We did our mission. There were were no outbursts, there was no dissatisfaction," he said. Addressing criticisms that openly homosexual soldiers would endanger troops, Choi said: "When you kick out an Arab linguist, I think it does endanger our troops."

October 21, 2010 6:38 PM  
Blogger JimK said...

well, Jim did not post my comment on this today

This is an unmoderated discussion. I don't review comments and decide whether they should go up or not, you write 'em and click Submit and they become part of the Internet forever.

There are two exceptions. One, sometimes I decide to delete a comment. Not very often, but personal comments and completely irrelevant comments have a chance of getting trashed. BTW, before you start whining, let me say: there is no rule other than "don't piss me off." I am happy to allow people to discuss issues in my living room, but if you put your feet on my coffee table I just might kick you out. (Sometimes I delete users too, obviously not very often.)

Two, Blogger has a fairly new feature, a spam filter, that catches comments it interprets as spam and hides them away in a special folder. So far Blogger has only blocked legitimate comments, and has allowed real spam to be published undetected. I don't constantly monitor the spam folder, so if you have tried to post something and it disappears -- and I understand this is disconcerting, it literally disappears while you're looking at it -- please send me an email at info at ttf.org and when I see your email I'll release the comments.

JimK

October 21, 2010 6:52 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

that's alright, Jim, I'm not disconcerted

I had responded to Bea and Dio but it's no big deal

I mentioned it offhandedly because Bea was inexplicably responding twice in a row to the same thing so I thought she might have seen the disappeared comment before it was deleted

but, I guess not

have a good one

October 21, 2010 7:08 PM  
Anonymous Robert said...

No one cares about the issues that TTF cares about.

But apparently anonymous in his various guises does.

Huh?

BTW, I'm not sure if I would vote for Barack Obama for MoCo school board. I'm not sure if I'll ever vote for him again. Forgive me, but I am furious beyond expression about DADT. It affects my friends directly.

Bones is having some sort of episode about self-hating gay people, gay panic defence, and David Boreaneaz' character's prejudices tonight, with a little bit about Spitzer. Interesting.

rrjr

October 21, 2010 7:47 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"But apparently anonymous in his various guises does."

not really, Robert

if someone were to make an issue of it, I'd probably vote for them but I'm not expecting anyone to bring it up because, I don't think many people see any value pursuing it

I imagine that people who have kids that are affected are simply adapting in ways that don't involve the school board

I just come here because I like to argue with liberals

doesn't have to be the topic of sex ed

right now, I think it's especially enjoyable to discuss how liberals were fooled by Obama

October 21, 2010 9:01 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

(Oct. 22) -- President Bill Clinton lost track of "the Biscuit," special codes that allow the president to launch a nuclear attack, according to retired Gen. Hugh Shelton.

The codes, printed on a credit-card-sized certificate, are a key part of America's nuclear protocol. They allow the president to open a special briefcase that contains instructions for a surprise nuclear launch, and the commander in chief is supposed to keep the card with him at all times.

Under Bill Clinton, the card disappeared.

In a new book, the retired general says Bill Clinton lost track of a certificate that holds nuclear codes "for months."

"The codes were actually missing for months," Shelton, former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, wrote in his book "Without Hesitation: The Odyssey of an American Warrior."

"This is a big deal -- a gargantuan deal -- and we dodged a silver bullet," Shelton wrote.

Shelton believes that Clinton inappropriately put one of his aides in charge of guarding the codes and that he didn't even know they'd been misplaced.

Once a month, Pentagon officials stop by the White House to ensure the president still has the card. For at least two months in a row, one of Clinton's aides told the military checker that the president was in a meeting but that he definitely had the codes.

But when the time came to update the codes with new ones sometime in 2000, Clinton confessed that the card was missing. According to his book, Shelton burst into the office of then Defense Secretary William Cohen and said, "You are not going to believe this."

New codes were issued within minutes, and procedures have since been changed. Now the Pentagon official who goes to the White House once a month is required to physically see the card in the president's possession.

Analysts say the case of the missing codes marks the most serious security breach in American nuclear history.

Shelton claims that his story about the missing nuclear codes has never before been publicly known. But another retired military chief, Air Force Lt. Col Robert Patterson, gave a similar account in his own book published seven years ago.

Patterson was one of the officials in charge of carrying the briefcase with the nuclear instructions, and described how at one point he had to ask Clinton for the codes to swap them for updated versions. That routine check happened on the morning after the Monica Lewinsky scandal broke.

"He thought he just placed them upstairs," Patterson told ABC News. "We called upstairs, we started a search around the White House for the codes, and he finally confessed that he in fact misplaced them. He couldn't recall when he had last seen them."

There's been no comment from Clinton.

As for the complex, layered security system that ensures America's nuclear secrets don't fall into the wrong hands, Shelton wrote, "You can do whatever you can and think you have an infallible system, but somehow someone always seems to find a way to screw it up."

October 22, 2010 8:37 AM  
Anonymous Aunt Bea said...

Here's a story about another stealth candidate:

40 Alaska Republicans Tell Joe Miller to Start Answering Questions

Forty members of the Alaska Republican Party have signed their names to a letter urging tea party [and Palin endorsed] candidate Joe Miller, who is running as the GOP nominee for Senate in that state, to begin answering questions about his own background and qualifications for office, the Anchorage Daily News reports.

"It is unacceptable -- and certainly not a winning strategy -- to explicitly refuse to answer reasonable questions about oneself, and to disrespect the Alaska public and the press' right to do so before the questions have even been asked," the letter, which was signed by members of the party's central committee as well as other GOP officials, stated.

At issue is the media's attempt to find out more about Miller's time at the Fairbanks North Star Borough. After Miller's personnel file was leaked to reporters, it was learned that Miller had violated the borough's ethics policy and was nearly fired as a result of conducting political activities on computers belonging to the borough's other employees. A judge in Alaska is expected to rule this weekend on whether the public is entitled to know more about what is contained in the file, Anchorage Daily News reported.

Angry at the initial leaking of the information in his personnel file, Miller described his decision to stop answering any further questions about his own background following a debate with Democrat Scott McAdams and write-in candidate Sen. Lisa Murkowski at the Anchorage Chamber of Commerce on Oct. 11.

This week, security guards hired by Miller detained Tony Hopfinger, an editor and reporter for the Alaska Dispatch, who was attempting to get answers from the candidate at a campaign appearance at a public school. Miller contends that Hopfinger was trespassing and acting in an aggressive fashion. Hopfinger says the security guards handcuffed him after he attempted to ask Miller a series of questions related to his time at the Fairbanks North Star Borough.

The letter from the Alaska GOP concluded that Miller's refusal to answer questions, whether they be personal in nature or not, was not in keeping with the country's constitutional principles.

"This is not unfair scrutiny," the letter stated. "It is what the Founding Fathers foresaw voters considering when they wrote the U.S. Constitution. It is at best inconsistent and at worst hypocritical to conceal facts about one's past while at the same time basing one's campaign on a claim to respect the U.S. Constitution as the most important source of political legitimacy in the land."

October 22, 2010 9:08 AM  
Anonymous Robert said...

I would assert that discussion and learning are preferable to arguing?

rrjr

October 22, 2010 11:37 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Interesting editorial in today's Washington Post. (11/23, p.A18)

Did you notice that they mentioned Ms.Schaerr's political/activist background when they endorsed Mr. Durso ("we are troubled by her involvement with a group hostile to gay rights. She is also [a] member of the board of the Family Leader Network, one of the groups that sued Montgomery school officials in an unsuccessful effort to block a new sexual education curriculum that dealt forthrightly with sexual orientation.")?

HHhhhmmmm...the cat's out of the bag!

October 26, 2010 10:51 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Ooops! Today's date of the Post editorial cited above is 10/26 (not 10/23)...sorry!

October 26, 2010 10:59 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home