I'm so tired...

I Killed the Alureon.H Virus in Windows XP!

I wanted to post this on several Tech sites that have entries in their forums on killing the Alureon.H virus (and other rootkit viruses), but if you haven't been registered for several days, or you're not an expert user, they don't want to hear from you. So I thought I'd post it here, where at least I can come back if I ever need to know how to do this again.


I got this nasty bug on my computer that hijacked my browser, prevented me from running Windows Update, and slowed down the processes on my computer to where I was pulling out my hair. When the computer booted, Windows Update would try and run, only to give me the standard "Windows Update was not able to finish" or something like that. Every time I followed a link - search result or otherwise - I was redirected to an advertising or marketing site. A couple of porn search terms were automatically inserted into a marketing search engine and I knew I had to do something.

I couldn't do a Google search - I would browse to Google only to have IE say Cannot Display the Page, with the Check your Connection button. Firefox and Opera wouldn't work either. I found that I could somewhat bypass browser redirects by pasting the shortcut of search results into the Address bar - instead of clicking on a link.

So I had a very difficult time. I would watch a svchost process eat up CPU cycles and consume memory while monitoring the Task Manager. I would kill the process and things would speed up again, but it did play havoc with my internet connection.

I knew I had a virus, trojan, or some other hijacker so I immediately enlisted the help of my virus and nastyware tools:


I ran Spybot S & D, Panda AntiVirus, MalwareBytes Anti Malware...

I downloaded and installed Ad-Aware, SpywareBlaster...

I ran Trend Micro's House Call Scanner... ATF Cleaner...

AND NOTHING WORKED!

None of these tools worked 100%. Ad-Aware did stop the annoying browser redirects, which was a bit more satisfying than Spybot. I still like Spybot, but the Tea Timer didn't do anything for redirects which were constant. BUT THEY DETECTED NOTHING!

Somehow, I was enticed to try the Windows Live OneCare Safety Scanner. Normally, I give low credence to the standard out-of-the-box Microsoft tools, but having no other immediate options, I went for it.

It took a long time, but the Windows Live OneCare Safety Scanner didn't miss a thing. There they were - several items:

two virus-infected exe files (which I was able to quarantine)
a java class infected with the TrojanClicker Win32/Yabector.B
another class infected with an exploit: Java/CVE-200805353.JJ

and right at the bottom of the list, an entry that said Win32/Alureon.H - alureon intelide

a very, very nasty rootkit virus. It's no wonder it wasn't detected. Windows LiveOne Scanner - Hooray for you!

Well, that at least gave me something to go on. Finally. Doing a search on Alureon.H brought me to the solution buried down in the bottom of this forum,

http://social.answers.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/msescan/thread/f33efa3a-ac7d-429d-ae91-b2fcde1d0578

with the majority of "experts" saying to bite the bullet, save data and do a clean install of Windows. Been there, done that. I didn't want to do it again. Sigh. I NEVER want to do that again (if I can help it. What a pain!) At the bottom of the forum, a Dr. Trissell has the following procedure:

SOLUTION: For XP users who have the Virus WIN32/Alurion.H and who have unwanted Google search redirects and who can't manually access the microsoft update page, you have an infected RAS Automatic Connection Driver infection (rasacd.sys) and there are no antivirus programs which can fix it.  Period.  All they can do is detect it.

PRINT OUT THESE INSTRUCTIONS FOR USE IN THIS CURE.

(1) Go to your system drive, get into the i386 directory (e.g. C:\i386), and locate the rasacd.sys file (compresed and clean).  Highlight it, right click and selectCopy.

(2) Go back to your main system directory (e.g. C:). Right click anywhere in the white space on the page (but not in a folder) and selectPaste.  The Copy function automatically uncompresses the file.  Check the directory to make sure it contains rasacd.sys.

(3) Click Start and Shutdown and when the menu appears, selectRestart.

(4) Watch the reboot carefully and when you get the black screen, look for the white letters (usually in the upper right corner) which sayF2 to enter Setup and F12 to enter boot menu - Quickly press the F12 key.

(5) Load your Windows Setup CD into the CD Drive. (Hopefully you didn't put the CD into the drive before I told you to.  If you did, then stop the Windows installation and go back to step (3) above and start over).

(6) Using the up/down arrows, select the menu item that boots to a CD drive and pressENTER. Somewhere between this step and the next 2, you will be asked to log in as Administrator and key in the password (if there is none, just pressENTER.

(7) When prompted for "which system do you want to start," pick the option number which has the drive letter whereyour windows system is installed followed by the wordWINDOWS (e.g. 1  C: WINDOWS), key the number for that option,  and press ENTER.

(8) The CD will transfer some files (watch the bottom of the screen).  When it finishes, you get a menu.  You want the option which repairs your system, soPRESS THE "R" KEY NOW.

(9) You will find yourself at a classic MS DOS black screen in your Windows directory (e.g. C:\WINDOWS>).  Now follow these instructions exactly in my order.

 (a) At the blinking cursor, type CD ..  and press ENTER (you will now see C:>)

 (b) After C:> type CD C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM32\DRIVERS and pressENTER

 (c) After C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM32\DRIVERS> type RENAME rasacd.sys rasacd.old and pressENTER (don't forget the spaces between the three "words")

 (d) Now after C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM32\DRIVERS> type COPY C:\RASACD.SYS (followed by a space) and pressENTER

 (e) Now type CD .. and you will see C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM32>

 (f) Now type CD DLLCACHE and press ENTER (you will see C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM32\DLLCACHE>

 (g) After C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM32\DLLCACHE> type RENAME rasacd.sys rasacd.oldand press ENTER

 (h) Now after C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM32\DLLCACHE> type  COPY C:\RASACD.SYS (followed by a space) and press ENTER

 (i) YOU ARE ALMOST DONE.  THE PROBLEM IS NOW CURED. After C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM32\DLLCACHE> typeEXIT and press ENTER. 

(10) Now you can remove the Setup CD from the drive and let the system reboot normally.  When it is up and running, try a Google search and see that the problem is gone.  Also go tohttp://update.microsoft.com and see that you now have no problems doing a manual windows update.

CONGRATULATIONS - YOU ARE NOW A CERTIFIED WIN32/Alureon.H removal technician.

I followed the procedure exactly as listed above (though to be honest, inserting the Windows XP CD at bootup produced the same screens as pressing F12, without having to wait to insert it into the CD tray). I rebooted my machine and thought it was done. It began installing Windows Updates and everything looked good. In fact it completed them. I tried a search in IE and actually got results without being redirected to some advertising or marketing site. I was excited and relieved. Until I tried browsing to Windows Update or Google. Neither page would display. Sigh. I wasn't done, it appeared.

Well, Dr. Trissell got it mostly correct. The Live OneCare Scanner mentioned intelide (which at first glance, I thought might have been a variant name of the virus) which I searched for on a different computer. I found out that it isn't a virus variant name, but a system32 driver as well. I followed Dr. Trissell's procedure again, substituting INTELIDE.SYS for RASACD.SYS.

That was the ticket. I have been virus-free for several reboots, several hours and I have successfully updated Windows - twice! I am so relieved that I don't have to do the Save Data, Reinstall clean Windows exercise. Dr. Trissell - whoever you are, THANK YOU!

Happy Tax Day - Enjoy your tea

As I chuckle on the whole idea of "tea parties", I have to wonder how many of these conservatives think "tea" has to do with the letter "t" as in "Taxes". Then I think that maybe they're a little more historically aware of the Boston Tea Party, where angry protesters dressed as Native Americans (nee American Indians) and dumped the King's tea into the Boston Harbor as a protest against arbitrary taxation.

In either case, the idea that today's tea parties have any relation to the historical event, apart from obscure symbolism, seems to be quite typical of the conservative mind.

In past times, I might have put the word "conservative" in double quotes to make a distinction between thinking, intelligent conservatives and the bloviating nitwits that seem to make up their public face these days. But alas, they are one and the same. There are no thinking, sentient conservatives these days - they're all a part of the same ridiculous club. They have one of the biggest bloviators in Rush Limbaugh, leading their public consciousness and leading them out into the far wilderness of mumbling, angry malcontents.

Well, the truth is, the Tea Parties today have very little to do with the Boston Tea Party. What of the King's (President Obama's) provisions would these conservatives throw away to protest unfair taxation? Should they fire their Police forces? Should they destroy their water filtration plants? How about getting out the heavy equipment and breaking up the King's Asphalt that covers their neighborhood streets?

They're protesting today because they feel they are ENTITLED to a free country where one keeps all of his or her earnings and the government provides a secure environment in which they can live, prosper and profit without any strings attached. Security and freedom come at a cost, but they'll never get it. No one likes taxation. No one wants to see money skimmed off the top of the fruits of their labor. But no one wants to live in a country like Somalia, where "taxes" are paid in the form of tithes to the local warlord for "protection". But that's essentially the trade-off.

I pay taxes because I want to drink clean water. I pay taxes because I want to be able to move around the country in a conveyance that isn't hampered by the local terrain. I pay taxes because I want a ready and able military to defend the country and deter any enemies. I pay taxes because I want an impartial third party to be ready to mediate disputes between me and those who seek to profit by me. I pay taxes because I want my children to have a place where they can learn about life, science and society that may not be drawn from my own limited experience. I pay taxes because I want to support the country that I love and all that it provides.

So I will have a cup of tea today, and I will toast the Federal Government and Income Taxes because they have made my life and my living in this great country possible.

Cheers!

Welcome to the Wilderness!

It would probably be justified to accuse me of partisan leanings, because I am absolutely delighted to see the GOP struggling to find an identity. What they seem to be failing to realize is that they never lost it. The GOP is trying to figure out how this identity can be revered in today's political and economic times. They're bumping up against the brick wall of reality. The problem is, the GOP identity is completely out of sync with a United States struggling to do the right thing for the times.



The GOP is a party of profiteering, privatization, and preaching. They rail against government, socialism, and moral depravity while completely oblivious to the fact that they are the best example of all they despise. The GOP is the strongest advocate for socialization when they demand that government provide a free market economic climate gratis, no strings attached. Without protectionism and government funds in the forms of charters and stimulus incentives, businesses would hardly be profitable. An unprotected market would be so unstable that sales and performance projections would be unthinkable. In this country, businesses can thrive because people are free and secure enough to participate in capitalism and claim some level of economic equality. That's the beauty and the utility of government. It helps to provide an environment where markets and democracy can coexist.

Debate 1: Obama supporters disappointed

First off, I wouldn't say that I'm a die-hard Obama supporter (I wanted Hillary, after Joe and John dropped out), but I am excited about Obama now.

I was disappointed by the debate. I thought the winner was John McCain, hands down. I was looking for a knockout punch like the rest of them. Short of that, I wanted to see Obama become a little scrappy in a righteous sort of way. The facts and right answers were on his side, but trying to feel objective, I felt he didn't push the presidential factor enough. He was thoughtful, and in command of the facts, but there were definitely points he should have scored in a more direct way.

When McCain talked about cutting spending, Obama should have hit him hard on areas where spending shouldn't be cut, and where taxes shouldn't be cut. Why wasn't our record deficit mentioned?

Well, it was a foreign policy debate. I get it. But Obama could have easily knocked McCain down a few more notches. I think it's a question of style. I hope Obama can break out of his well-exposed character and show a little more steel.

Funny thing, I don't think as an Obama supporter I'm alone in my assessment of his performance. I think quite a few of us thought McCain won. I'm pleased that the media doesn't see it that way, but I wonder if that just illustrates that they're no longer in the tank for McCain. That would be good. Maybe I don't have to hold my breath any longer.

Let's hope Obama doesn't rest on his laurels over this. He needs to stay aggressive and take this all the way to end.

Thank God for Sarah Palin!

I don't know if it has dawned on anyone, but there in fact, is a testament to the foreign policy experience of GOP Vice President nominee Sarah Palin.

What, you ask? Think about it...

Russia has not attacked us in the 21 months that Sarah Palin has been governor of Alaska. Some say the fact that Sarah Palin is governor makes that more inevitable. I say they're wrong. If it were truly inevitable, they would have attacked by now. I mean, look at what they did to Georgia and Chechnya! What stopped an expansionist Russian foray into the northwestern wilderness?

Ice? Give me a break! The ice has been receding and you know it. I'll tell you what. Governor Sarah Palin, that's what.

Thank God for Sarah Palin and her foreign policy experience!

Lost my head, but now I'm back

As the Democrats took over in November of 2006, it seemed a little pointless to continue posting, since most of what I had to say concerned my opposition to Republican policies and antics.

I could rant about the "spineless" Democrats, but let's face it, even at their worst, they've been better than Republican rule in the House and Senate. And one does have to realize that the Democrats haven't really had a majority in the Senate... they can set the agenda, but that's as far as they can really take it.

Thank goodness for a Presidential election because we get to see the Republicans at it again.

See the entry for "Grand Old Party" here:

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/opinion/374036_ltrs8.html

An embarassment of leadership

First, Newt Gingrich tells us that we're in World War III (thinking, of course, that framing the explosion of conflict in the Middle East between US forces and Iraqi insurgents, Sunnis and Shiites, and now Israel and Lebanon/Hizbollah will make it politically expedient for the GOP to remain in power) What Gingrich fails to realize is that most Americans are well aware of how dire the future would be if America had to depend upon the Bush Administration's leadership during such a global conflict.

I've never liked Newt Gingrich, but I always respected his intelligence -- until I realized that he's absolutely lost his marbles. I suppose a telling sign is that he is trying to be a 2008 Presidential candidate -- that should have tipped me off. But this notion that framing the war on terror, the occupation of Iraq, and the escalation of hostilities between Israel and Hamas and Israel and Hizbollah as World War III is not only a stretch (at least we hope so) but just plain silly in terms of a political strategy.

But let's take Newt at his word -- World War III is upon us. The once great nation of the United States of America was in days past, a beacon of freedom and high moral clarity. The United States was the most (certainly not truest) altruistic superpower in the world. Where is the United States today?

We don't have a leg to stand on. Not only do we have a credibility vacuum in the global scheme of things, but now we've got a leader who appears to be a buffoon to the entire rest of the world. We've got a man who has proudly proclaimed his intention of exporting Democracy to one of the most troubled areas, but by force and through some of the most breathtaking incompetence ever imagine. The Iraq democracy has become a sad joke to the rest of the world. The very notion of which is sufficient to publicly ridicule Bush -- the "man with vision" (as Russia's Putin did in front of a chuckling audience of world leaders and representatives). We've got a man who uses diplomatic presence to talk about roast pig, a man who (as leader of what used to be the world's most influential nation) is now saying that "they" need to talk to Syria and get Hizbollah to "stop this sh*t". Bush is from Texas and a plain speaking man. The fact that he used the word sh*t is entirely trivial and unimportant. More important is that he is abbrogating the traditional role of the U.S. President to broker (if not peace) a cessation of hostilities between Israel and her many enemies. Bush is clearly not up to the task, and as such, talks about an external "they" as having the means and diplomatic channels to effect such a change. Bush is content to play second fiddle to Kofi Annan of the United Nations.

Dr. Annan has always pursued diplomacy as is wont of his position. But for the first time in many, many years, we are seeing a second rate President of the United States, who not only doesn't appear to care too terribly much about what is happening in the world, but seems at all unable to do anything about it -- unable to function in his traditional role.

Bush is, was, always has been a PR man. In my opinion, that is what his presidency is all about. Real issues, reality, and the integration of American policy within the global community are simply beyond his abilities and competence. And sadly, for the United States, he's been given two terms. Well, five years later, it's plain to see to all but the most die-hard fans of Bush, that this Administration has actually created a climate of conflict and aggression in many parts of the world. The Cowboy Diplomacy, as it has been described, has been an utter and incontrovertible failure. The world is not safer -- not because of September 11, but because of the Bush Adminstration's ineffective and misguided response to September 11. The war on Terror isn't about defeating terrorists. It's about profiting by propping up the military-industrial-energy alliance to the detriment of America's influence abroad, and especially the the troops who are nothing more than necessary sacrifices in the pursuit of profit.

Bush's foreign policy ineptness is coming home to roost. America is not only far less influential than it has been in the last fifty years, it is also becoming a laughing stock because of the embarassing buffoon who is the current "leader of the free world." God help America. It's appearing more and more that America is absolutely devoid of leadership.

Democrats and the White Flag

There it is... the same old tired argument about how the Democrats want to cut and run. I'll tell you one thing. Even though, that isn't the Democrat position, if it were actually distilled down to it, cutting and running is probably a lot smarter than simply keeping America's youth in Iraq for target practice.

There's a lot of good being done by our troops in Iraq, but the amount of progress is, unfortunately, being negated day by day as the country slips further into anarchy and civil disintegration. Even our embassy in Iraq says that the situation is showing fewer signs of being able to develop into a secure and democratic Iraq. That's OUR embassy, folks -- our government.

The choice of the Democrats in Iraq is not a white flag. Sadly, that appears to be their choice in politics here in the states. For every report that the "left wing" of the democratic party is trying to hijack the party, I have to ask...if a vast majority of independents are opposed to the war, does that mean that all independents are therefore liberals? Why are the Democrats afraid of stating their position forcefully? With the exception of Jack Murtha, and I suppose John Kerry (who probably feels safe letting Murtha take the brunt of the invective) most Democrats are still too timid to call the Bush Administration on their FAILED POLICY. Why they want to let Karl Rove beat them into submission time and time again is beyond me. Perhaps Hillary, Maria Cantwell and Joe Lieberman are wiser than many Democrats give them credit. If the other Democrats won't stand up and tout their differences with the status quo (or the retarded "stay the course" strategy) then the only other option is to deflate Karl Rove's accusation that Democrats are weak on national security by making themselves appear to be Republicans. It shouldn't be that way.

Ask our servicemen and women. What do they think? Recently, increasing numbers of reports state that most Representatives who are in contact with our troops are reporting more and more that our troops see the objective failing in Iraq and want to get the hell out of there. It's true. Jack Murtha didn't come to his conclusion because he woke up one day and decided to oppose the Bush plan. Murtha had the goddamned CURIOSITY to learn what was going on, and decided that the current situation is insanity. Contrary to Rove, Bush, Cheney and yes, even Rumsfeld, Murtha has the credibility and the honest-to-goodness entitlement to state his position. He's seen war, he's seen the current command, he knows what he's talking about.

Until the Iraqis understand and see proof that America is leaving them to run and support their own country, will they take the reins of the country. If America's involvement is open-ended, what motivation do Iraqis have to take matters into their own hands?

Lastly, if independents and sensible moderate Democrats (AND cloth-coat Republicans) see this war as a now-unwinnable mistake that is costing us billions and the lives of our young Americans, that isn't the left wing of the Democratic party. That's mainstream America. We already know the Republicans won't listen. If the Democrats continue to shy away from their constituents and the will of the people, then they can all go to hell, knowing they've let the entire nation down. They are the only hope for this rubber stamp, do-nothing Congress. But it sure looks like they're going to blow it once again.

Democrats will wave the White Flag in Politics. Republicans may carry the day, but they've already practically sealed America's future ruin. There isn't a child alive today who won't feel the oppression of years of bad economic health, thanks to the corrupt, power-drunk, spend-happy Republicans of today.

The true nature of House Republicans

After Jack Murtha urged the end to new deployments and a measured withdrawal of American troops from Iraq, the GOP decided to push their typical political tactics into overdrive. Rather than create a dialog about what's best for the troops, best for Iraq and best for America, they pushed Jack Murtha's objective to the extreme -- calling for the "immediate withdrawal" of troops from Iraq.

GOPers on here point to the overwhelming defeat of the bill as evidence that the Democrats won't even stand with their own, or that they don't even hold to their convictions.

Funny thing, only the GOP sheep see things that way. The rest of the country and the world saw a display of scared, nervous Republicans trying to push back against the tide of American frustration with the war effort, the mismanagement of the Bush Administration, and the head-in-the-sand politics of the GOP.

On political blogs is this display in its full regalia. Republicans deride Democrats for a lack of spine because they didn't vote to sink the ship when all that was called for was schedule for decommission. It was just another example of how Republicans can't engage in a conversation anymore. They must simply attack anyone who offers a different view of things.

Well, America was watching. We now have the final proof of the priorities of these Republicans -- they don't care about the troops, about what's best for America, only their own rhetoric and political self-worth. The world saw a shameful stunt, and only GOPers thought it was a brilliant move.

Yes, America was watching and while most didn't like what they saw, there was a sigh of relief. Here was a welcome sign that Republicans were going to begin their immediate withdrawal in November 2006, ushered out by the voting public.

A GEICO Commercial, sort of...

FEMA Director Allbaugh: Mr. President, we had two levees break around New Orleans, sir.

President Bush: Which levees? What are you talking about?

Allbaugh: The ones that were in the Southeast Louisiana Urban Flood Control Project, you know, SELA. They needed additional funds for rebuilding and upgrading pumps, but we cancelled about $250 million of scheduled repairs because of funding for the Iraq war, Homeland Security and Federal Tax cuts.

President Bush: But we didn't cut the funding of SELA.

Allbaugh: Yes, we did, sir. You even demanded that the Army Corps of Engineers budget be cut by 20% for the Lake Ponchatrain project. The levees were never finished, sir.

President Bush: Well, don't worry, Joe. I've got good news!

Allbaugh: What's that, sir?

President Bush: I just shot in the mid 60's for 18 holes, yesterday!

Karl Rove is actually in trouble!

I am disgusted by the antics of Karl Rove as the next guy, but honestly, I never thought that going after him was going to amount to much. Democrats scream for his ouster but they're too shrill themselves.

If they'd only sit back and wait for the press to do their job, we could make this whole political arena less acidic. Of course, having been beat up so many times by Mr. Rove, I can understand why they're out for blood. But they ought to just cool it and wait.

Karl Rove is in a world of trouble. Right wing blogs and the Hannitys and O'Reilly's are constantly going on and on about how Wilson is the real criminal and that Karl Rove didn't commit a crime...except he did. More than one, in fact. Karl Rove, in addition to learning that Valerie Plame's identification was sensitive information (it was indicated as such on a State Dept memo that he had access to BEFORE he ever talked with Matt Cooper or Robert Novak), Karl Rove gave false testimony to the FBI in 2003, claiming no involvement and denying that he divulged Valerie Plame's involvement in Joe Wilson's Niger trip. Such are the facts.

One way or another, the man has serious troubles. It will be interesting to see how quickly he's pardoned by Bush once a conviction is leveled.

The seeds of hypocrisy are being sown

Pro-Life Chemicals...

Oh, I could be very partisan and talk about the hypocrisy surrounding this story:

Unborn babies soaked in chemicals

But the fact is, this information is just being released. The hypocrisy you ask?

The hypocrisy would be that those same individuals who talk about the unborn fetus as a human being with rights also defend the industries that disregard laws allowing pollutants into the environment that harm these same unborn human beings with rights.

But I'm stepping back. There isn't any hypocrisy. At least not yet. If these revelations about how the environment affects the unborn result in no changes towards the legislation of laws related to the EPA, then I would begin screaming hypocrisy. But it's too early to do that with any integrity.

The U.S. DID have a post-war plan.

There are now new allegations by British memos that accused the Americans of little or no post-war planning. I think we all know that is patently false. The U.S. did have a plan. From observation, it can be seen that the U.S. plan was this:

Depose Saddam Hussein from power;

Rebuild the oil production facilities;

Give Iraqis a true sense of freedom by allowing them to enter government buildings, museums and other civic structures freely, and take whatever they needed (or felt they needed);

Allow anti-Hussein and pro-Hussein forces to freely associate within Iraq's cities and regions;

End the war by publicly declaring military operations to be over, and "Mission Accomplished";

Round up un-armed Iraqis, subject them to humiliation and torture in one of Saddam's prisons so they wouldn't get too comfortable with the power vacuum;

Allow Iraq to become truly free ("Freedom is on the march");

Leave Iraq in a truly free anarchic state, and pull the troops out before expectations of a representative democracy can be established.

Given these postwar plans, I'd say the Bush team are about 80% successful. Way to go, America!

UK and US Had PreWar Plans

The bottomless capacity for subterfuge by the Bush Administration would be amusing or laughable if it didn't result in the loss of lives, billions of dollars, and the United State's stature in the world community.

We learn now that there were secret meetings between Downing Street and Bush's Cabinet in July of 2002 that fixed upon a determination to go after Saddam Hussein militarily.

Here's the clinker: [...intelligence and facts were being fixed around policy].

We have the Bush Administration acting exactly like Third World warlords, and (if I were a betting man) most of the public will probably be completely okay with that. Or at least, the media will fail to accurately portray the dishonest and political implications of how this Administration operated -- including timing the military action announcements to coincide with the midterm elections.

This is truly shameful. Just like EVERYTHING ELSE embraced by this Administration.

Goodbye, Tom Morgan.

I just found out that almost a month ago, an old friend, Tom Morgan of the Bay area band Transcender passed away in his home from carbon monoxide poisoning. I don't know if it was at his hand or if it was accidental.

I had lost touch with Tom, but had some difficulty when trying to locate him a few times in the past years.

After his passing, I was able to understand why. For someone so on top of the pulse of artistic creation, Tom was resistant to joining the online community. He earned the nickname "Analog Tom" because he was so late in getting an e-mail address. I would have guessed the Tom would have been one of the first.

I was in a high school rock and roll band with Tom, Stefan, Jim and Joel called The Spies. Tom, Stefan and Joel brought most of the talent at first, and made us somewhat popular in the suburbs of Maryland where we all grew up.

Tom went on to write his own music and create his own artistic persona through bands in Baltimore and in the San Francisco / Oakland area. He even played a couple of gigs with Alex Chilton of Boxtops fame.

As the years went by, Tom would pop in and out of my life, and on the rare occasion that we were both back in Maryland, visiting our respective families, we'd get together. Stefan and Tom shared a bit of musical history at the University of Michigan as well.

I had sort of come to regard him as my untapped connection into the world of the arts. Deep down I knew, as probably many did, that Tom was going to make a name for himself one way or another. I had always imagined hearing news of a new breakout band with Tom at the helm. Well, it sounds like it was almost to be. His band's "Self-Titled Debut Album" seemed to be earning a few accolades from the indie music world. But sadly, Tom won't pilot this rocket.

He was a fantastic musician, songwriter, artist, photographer, and an all-around interesting fellow. If I had to describe my sense of Tom it would be that he was "un-anchored" by the constraints of conventionalism. I'm quite heartbroken to hear of his passing. So long, Tom. I'll miss you.

Redefining Democrats

It is very interesting how the media begins talking about the redefinition of Democrats when the Democrats aren't ready to commit to anything right now.

Redefining Democrats? There are essentially two indictments of the left as consistently mentioned in the mainstream media (or MSM, the anachronym used often by conservatives): The Democrats let their left-leaning base hijack the Democratic party; and the Democrats need to reconnect with middle America using the Moral Values issues.

Both are wrong. Completely wrong. The Democrats do not need to connect with middle America using the Moral Values issues. Democrats espouse moral values. How brilliantly the Rovian strategy plays out past the election! Karl Rove and the Republicans created a Moral Values dilemma by unfairly promoting a wedge issue. It is our achilles heel. We can't marginalize these people in the interest of appearing mainstream, and we can't embrace them in the interest of proving our inclusivity. It is a weakness for which we paid dearly. Do we abandon our base? Do we abandon the gay and lesbian issue?

No. We don't. We remain the party we've always been, accepting of gays and lesbians.

We just need to be smarter in how we address those attacks against our plank. It is very likely that Gavin Newsom in San Francisco created the mess that pushed Gay Marriage into the national consciousness in such a way as to create a backlash. That he shouldn't have allowed gays to marry isn't the point. He shouldn't have allowed gays to marry in an Election Year.

Our other achilles heel is the abortion issue, though it is not as divisive an issue as the MSM believe. There are far more pro-choice conservatives than there are anti-choice liberals. Democrats have faith that the pro-choice conservatives will enjoin the fight to keep abortion legal and safe.

The absolute truth is there aren't any moral issues that separate Democrats from the "heartland." The Republicans have been brilliant in the ways they create a false sense of that.

Where Democrats have failed is in allowing Michael Moore and MoveOn.org to become the defacto voice of the liberal left within the party. The largest tool in their toolbelt is anger. Anger at Republicans and anger at George Bush. Anger is a motivating force, but it is a lousy messenger. It is a terrible messenger, because not only does it cloud the message, it DECIDES which message to broadcast.

MoveOn.org became a very good anti-War mouthpiece. They were on top of events, statistics and the misinformation that was disseminated by the Bush Administration. They would have served their constituency if they had remained just that. The problem that MoveOn experienced is almost entirely borne of anger. They chose sarcasm and anger to bring forth their message rather than PERSUASION.

As an example, MoveOn enlisted the help of their members in choosing video advertisements to air on national television. There were some very creative minds behind many of these videos. Some of the messages were very direct (and angry), while others were more subtle and thought-provoking. When the membership chose the videos to broadcast, they invariably selected the ones that appealed to the base - venting anger, frustration through cynicism and sarcasm. How very bold, how very compelling...to a liberal. When it came to choosing those videos that appealed to middle America or Bush supporters, most members opted for the emotional angry message. These are the very messages that seem to be at the heart of the loss of influence the Democrats are experiencing right now.

There is a problem with liberal anger. Liberals have been the object of much derision, negativity and ridicule by the right, ever since George McGovern's failed bid for the presidency. McGovern allowed liberalism to ascend to the ranks of the demonized, and Jimmy Carter cemented it there. Liberals are right to be angry, but wrong to employ it in politics. Politics are as conniving and underhanded as ever. The power comes in the deception, not in the appeal. Until the liberal wing of the Democratic party realizes that you catch more flies with honey, they'll consistently remain outside of the political power circles, as angry and marginalized as ever.

There will be a lot of soul-searching (to borrow a cliche from the MSM) by Democrats, and Michael Kinsley has exactly the right self-examination and apologies in mind when Democrats ponder what they should do.

This election was not about Moral Values. It was not about Terrorism. This election was about a fairy tale complete with immoral ogres and evil nymphs who wait to pounce upon the unsuspecting God-fearing, true-American citizen of the heartland. It is a story so compelling, it has the ogres and the nymphs wondering how they became so evil. The storyteller? None other than that masterful weaver of yarns himself, Karl Rove.

Eve of Choice - You will listen to us, Mr. President

Here it is, folks, the Eve of America's choosing.

How could a race be any fairer?

The American public split right down the middle. For two men, that situation is somewhat comforting. Neither man's worth has been abandoned by Americans at large.

Both Bush and Kerry can say with certainty and pride, "Half of the American people chose me to be their leader."

There's a lesson here as well. As we gaze upon what could very well be George Bush's last political hurrah, we can honestly cite many reasons for the mighty President who crafted our response to terrorism to suffer a defeat at the hands of his constituency.

Rather than a long post here (I'm awfully tired), let's just say that while his strength was laudable, he never fulfilled his duty to the American people. George Bush was never accountable to the American people. His administration was shrouded in secrecy, and his decisions alone seemed to guide the country in a direction that was accepted through resignation by more than half the country, and bitterly criticized by the rest.

To a man who, when asked about the divided country, claimed he just didn't see it, it was clear that he wasn't interested. You never listened to us, Mr. President.

George Bush, you had one of history's most advantageous opportunities to be greatness, itself. Instead, you chose Karl Rove and Grover Norquist. You could have been the leader for the 21st century, but you chose divisiveness and greed.

There was a time, after the spy plane incident with China, after the first tax cut, when I thought I could learn to accept your 2000 victory. It was not to be. I watched in disappointment as you gazed inward as Israelis and Palestinians ramped up their violence towards each other. I felt a twinge of alarm as the faith-based initiatives began to sprout some political power. And I watched with great dismay as the first tax cut gave way to new tax cuts, our projected surplus quickly sliding out of reach.

I thought, as so many others did, that you were going to be a reasonable man. As the deficit continued to grow, and the economy slunkered, you were redeemed by your response to the terrorist attacks.

Violence begets violence, many of us thought, but we stood silent as Afghanistan shook with dust and blood. We praised the swift victory, and the liberation of so many oppressed women and Afghan citizens. Then we got our taste of fundamental Islamic justice with the murder of Daniel Pearl. We appreciated the forcefulness you exhibited towards that violent and unforgiving aberration of peaceful religion.

You should have stopped there, Mr. President. You should have concentrated on rebuilding America, strengthening her economy, fighting for those who can't fight themselves. Instead you chose a direction that only a few wanted. We all voiced our opposition, and you never listened. You committed America to a mission that was not in her best interest at the time. You never listened to us.

As powerless as we were to stop you, you added insult to injury by squandering success in front of our noses. Knowledgeable critics and colleagues beseeched you to commit America's resources to ensure victory. You cast aside their concerns, just as you dismissed the pleas of millions of your countrymen, and the world population at large. Mr. President you squandered America's destiny and paid with the lives of our soldiers. You never listened to us.

A leader who claims to know best for his followers, without accepting advice from them is not a leader, but a dictator. Unfair comparisons abound, but you, Mr. President and your Administration, have been as close to a dictatorship this country has ever seen.

Democratic government is a devotional structure - by the people and for the people - the many, not the few.

These lessons were never learned during your four years, Mr. President. Perhaps on this Election Eve, the lesson will come home.

Are you listening now?

The new Bush/Cheney campaign ad is Brilliant!

Have you seen the new Bush-Cheney ad? It is absolutely brilliant!

It clearly illustrates that if the Democrats and their environmental-friendly candidate reclaim the White House, the wolf will remain on the Endangered-Species list, resulting in more Timber Wolves bent on attacking humans!

Scary!


They do look like puppies, don't they?

War on Terror vs. The Iraq War

I'm afraid we can't all agree that the Iraq war is part of the war on terror. To see and illustration of exactly how a lot of us feel, see yesterday's David Horsey cartoon in the Seattle Post-Intelligencer. It pretty much says it all. Here's the link:

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/horsey/viewbydate.asp?id=1080

The War in Iraq is a distraction. It is taking more and more effort to keep things from slipping into a bloody civil war. True, there are terrorists there, but they're not the same terrorists that would attack the U.S. on our soil. U.S. Intelligence says the same. In fact, most experts agree that going into Iraq began was a noble mission, but miscalculations and insufficient post-war planning have completely sabotaged the objective and created a bigger danger to U.S. interests than existed before.

The whole time our military is being engaged in Iraq, the rest of the world is becoming bolder and bolder, realizing that we're overextended and focused on Iraq.

So to say the war in Iraq is part of the war on Terror, is correct only in that the Iraq war is greatly benefitting the wrong side in the War on Terror.

If this is just liberal thinking, then we must have an abundance of liberals in the CIA, DIA, FBI and NSA. Who'd have guessed?