Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post - Will New Democratic Party Controlled Congress, Investigate Secret Republican "Orgs"?

host · 11-13-2006, 12:43 PM

Was Jack Abramoff an intelligence agent, controlled by the secretive christian fundametnatlist/republican party merged organization, the CNP?

Will democrats who will chair all house and senate investigative committees, look into any of this information? If this information and this agenda turns out to be accurate, should the republican party be treated by US authorities in a similar manner to the communist party? How can a "liberal media" pay so little attention to Abramoff's activities and background, to the CNP and it's leaders and financiers, and to the influence they wield over Bush, Cheney. et al, and to the damage they do to US domestic and foreign policy, and to US government finances........I'm still digesting these questions and I'll post along with you, if this thread "takes off".....

Quote:

Michael Hiltzik GOLDEN STATE; Abramoff Took Shot at Making Movies; [HOME EDITION]
Michael Hiltzik. Los Angeles Times. Los Angeles, Calif.: Jan 16, 2006. pg. C.1

..... Abramoff resurfaced in 1986 as founder of the International Freedom Foundation. IFF's function was to spread negative propaganda about the African National Congress, the opposition group that would eventually take over South Africa's government in the post- apartheid era, and its leader, Nelson Mandela. Many years later, the South Africans would reveal that IFF had been a front almost entirely funded by the apartheid-era regime.

Around the time he founded IFF, Abramoff also launched "Red Scorpion" as co-writer and producer, with an initial budget of about $12.5 million. The financial backers have never been fully disclosed, although it's known that Warner Bros. put up some money for distribution rights and the South African government provided military vehicles for the sets and troops as extras........

Quote:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...2500248_3.html
Abramoff as Auteur: He Was No Run of De Mille Movie Mogul

By Peter Carlson
Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, November 27, 2005; Page N01

....When "Red Scorpion" was released, it was picketed by anti-apartheid protesters angry that Abramoff had shot the movie in territory controlled by South Africa's white supremacist government, using soldiers and military equipment lent by the South Africans. The protesters would have been even angrier if they'd known that the International Freedom Foundation, a right-wing group founded by Abramoff, was secretly bankrolled by the South African army -- but that wasn't known until a South African colonel revealed it in 1995.....

Quote:

http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill...ff.html?200610

Editors Note:Front for Apartheid, appeared in Newsday, Sunday, July 16, 1995. The article was reported by Dele Olojede in South Africa and Timothy M. Phelps in Washington. The article concerns a Washington think-tank called the International Freedom Foundation that had branches in Johannesburg, South Africa and London, England. The International Freedom Foundation was actually a front for intelligence operators who worked on psycho-political operations to prolong apartheid. People involved included United States Department of State Officials, United States Congressmen, and US Intelligence agents. The article says "jobs" for South African intelligence provided at least half of the total IFF revenue, and South African military intelligence would send fees from the "jobs" directly to the IFF Washington office...

Quote:

http://www.seekgod.ca/cnp.a.htm#abramhoff
Jack Abramoff - CNP Member 1984-85, 1988. National Chairman, College of Republicans; Chairman, United Students of America Foundation, 'dedicated to educating students on the need to defund political activism on campus'; president Scorpion Film Productions, Inc.; chairman, Regency Entertainment Group, Ltd.; member, Board of Directors, The Conservative Caucus Research and Education Foundation. Former executive director, Citizens for America, former chairman, College Republican National Committee, and also USA Foundation.

In the 1984-85 Council for National Policy Annual Directory, it stated under his bio; "National Chairman, College Republicans; under his leadership, College Republican National Committee has become the largest, most active student political organization in America; Chairman, United Students of America Foundation, dedicated to educating students on the need to defund political activism on campus; Executive Producer, "Fallout", a student radio program.; President, United Students Press Service; Publisher, New American Magazine, a national monthly conservative student magazine; College Republicans confront leftist groups on campus and promote the conservative agenda...." He was based in Washington DC at that time with the United Students of America Foundation address being his contact. He was also a law student by then.

Jack Abramoff is an Orthodox Jew with close ties to Rabbi Lapin/Toward Tradition and movie critic Michael Medved. He was also a supporter of CNP's Tom Delay, whom Delay once called "one of my best friends."

"In July 2002, at the height of the anti-Jena campaign, Bauer and Rabbi Daniel Lapin, a fixture at Christian-right events, founded the American Alliance of Christians and Jews. On the group's board were Dobson, Robertson, Falwell and one Jack Abramoff. Lapin's organization, Toward Tradition, which administered the AACJ, received $25,000 from one of Abramoff's gambling industry clients in 2000; took $75,000 from Abramoff and his clients; and then, upon Abramoff's written instructions, hired the wife of Tony Rudy to the tune of $5,000 a month. Rudy, who was Tom DeLay's deputy chief of staff at the time, later a lobbyist, has been named in Abramoff's guilty plea" [http://www.thenation.com/doc/20060220/blumenthal ]

Founder and former chairman of The International Freedom Foundation (IFF) which was recently exposed by senior South African military personnel as a cut-out of the South African military and Special Branch. IFF functioned as a propaganda arm for South African STRATCOM directed against the African National Congress and the trade union confederation. 3b

3b. For STRATCOM> Stratcom's bogus news agency rings by Ann Eveleth , August 14, 1998 See: http://web.sn.apc.org/wmail/issues/980814/NEWS16.html ; See: A Small Circle of Friends. by Tom Burghardt Bay Area Coalition for Our Reproductive Rights (BACORR)> http://www.webcom.com/~pinknoiz/right/lpratt.html

RE: STRATCOM "...General Viljoen had personally ordered the attacks on so-called "African National Congress Targets" including the blow up of suspected anti-apartheid activists and critics. As revealed by former spy Craig Williamson from classified State Security Council documents, Viljoen was also responsible for Stratcom (Strategic Communications), a covert organization involved in frame-ups, political assassinations, bombings, torture, covert propaganda and "dirty tricks campaigns"...(Stefaans Brummer, "The Web of Stratcoms", Weekly Mail and Guardian. 24 February 1995)." 4

[4. http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/37/076.html > Political History of South Africa; > Fri, 9 May 97 ;EXPORTING APARTHEID TO SUB-SAHARAN AFRICA By Michel Chossudovsky; Michel Chossudovsky, Professor of Economics, University of Ottawa, author of The Globalization of Poverty: Impacts of IMF and World Bank Reforms, Third World Network, Penang and Zed Press, London, 1997. Copyright by Michel Chossudovsky, Ottawa, 1996.]

http://www.seekgod.ca/cnp.s.htm#sellars
Duncan Sellars - CNP 1984, 1988; former vice Chairman, International Freedom Foundation [IFF]; director, Council on Southern Africa; Former director, The Conservative Caucus Research Analysis and Education Foundation; Editor African Intelligence Digest; One of the I.F.F.'s less endearing traits is its uncritical support of the white South African government; advisory board, Institute of East-West Dynamics. SEE: UN Endorsement 54

Quote:

http://www.au.org/site/News2?page=Ne...=6949&abbr=cs_
Behind Closed Doors
Who Is The Council For National Policy And What Are They Up To? And Why Don’t They Want You To

Know?

by Jeremy Leaming and Rob Boston

When a top U.S. senator receives a major award from a national advocacy organization, it’s

standard procedure for both the politician and the group to eagerly tell as many people about

it as possible.

Press releases spew from fax machines and e-mails clog reporters’ in-boxes. The news media are

summoned in the hope that favorable stories will appear in the newspapers, on radio and on

television.

It was odd, therefore, that when U.S. Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) accepted a

“Thomas Jefferson Award” from a national group at the Plaza Hotel in New York City in August,

the media weren’t notified. In fact, they weren’t welcome to attend......

......The CNP was founded in 1981 as an umbrella organization of right-wing leaders who would

gather regularly to plot strategy, share ideas and fund causes and candidates to advance the

far-right agenda. Twenty-three years later, it is still secretly pursuing those goals with

amazing success.

Since its founding, the tax-exempt organization has been meeting three times a year. Members

have come and gone, but all share something in common: They are powerful figures, drawn from

both the Religious Right and the anti-government, anti-tax wing of the ultra-conservative

movement.

It may sound like a far-left conspiracy theory, but the CNP is all too real and, its critics

would argue, all too influential.

What amazes most CNP opponents is the group’s ability to avoid widespread public scrutiny.

Despite nearly a quarter century of existence and involvement by wealthy and influential

political figures, the CNP remains unknown to most Americans. Operating out of a non-descript

office building in the Washingomgton, D.C., suburb of Fairfax, Va., the organization has managed

to keep an extremely low profile an amazing feat when one considers the people the CNP courts.

New York Times reporter David Kirkpatrick was finally able to pierce the CNP veil in August

when he attended a gathering of the group in New York City just before the Republican

convention, where the organization presented Frist with the “Jefferson Award.” .......

Quote:

http://www.usnews.com/usnews/politic...august2004.htm

8/25/04
The real convention?
Republicans will be showcasing their "compassionate conservatism" at next week's convention in

Manhattan by featuring moderates like former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani and California Gov.

Arnold Schwarzenegger in key speaking roles. But this week, true-blue conservatives are

getting together in Gotham City to flex their own ideological muscles and exert their own

influence on the GOP. The supersecret Council for National Policy, founded at the onset of the

Reagan era, will be meeting in New York at an undisclosed location in hopes of avoiding

protesters. The thousand member group includes political heavyweights like John Ashcroft, Bill

Frist, and Tom Delay, religious leaders from Pat Robertson to James Dobson, media moguls like

Steve Forbes, and conservative billionaires Howard Ahmanson and Nelson Bunker Hunt.

Conservative Republicans boast that the council's meeting is the "real" convention. "It's the

old smoke-filled room, but I wouldn't say it's corrupt," says a source. "Rather it's just

where the work gets done." The group met in San Diego earlier this year and will meet again

soon after the November election. One issue sure to be debated is whether a legitimate

democracy is achievable in Iraq; some on the right believe that part of the Bush

administration's rationale for war was flawed. –Suzi Parker

Quote:

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=121170&page=1
Inside the Council for National Policy
Meet the Most Powerful Conservative Group You've Never Heard Of
By Marc J. Ambinder

W A S H I N G T O N, May 2 (2002)- When Steve Baldwin, the executive director of an

organization with the stale-as-old-bread name of the Council for National Policy, boasts that

"we control everything in the world," he is only half-kidding.

Quote:

From CNP executive director, Steve Baldwin:
http://www.regent.edu/acad/schlaw/la...4_2baldwin.PDF
CHILD MOLESTATION AND THE HOMOSEXUAL MOVEMENT

(From Page 1

"However, overwhelming evidence supports the
belief that homosexuality is a sexual deviancy often accompanied by
disorders that have dire consequences for our culture. A vast amount of
data demonstrating the deviant nature of the gay lifestyle is ignored by
the media as well as the leadership of the psychological, psychiatric, and
medical professions.
It is difficult to convey the dark side of the homosexual culture
without appearing harsh. However, it is time to acknowledge that
homosexual behavior threatens the foundation of Western civilization
the nuclear family. An unmistakable manifestation of the attack on the
family unit is the homosexual community’s efforts to target children both
for their own sexual pleasure and to enlarge the homosexual movement".

Half-kidding, because the council doesn't really control the world. The staff of about eight,

working in a modern office building in Fairfax, Va., isn't even enough for a real full-court

basketball game.

But also half-serious because the council has deservedly attained the reputation for

conceiving and promoting the ideas of many who in fact do want to control everything in the

world.

For many liberals, the 22-year-old council is very dangerous and dangerously secretive, and

has fueled conspiratorial antipathy. The group wants to be the conservative version of the

Council on Foreign Relations, but to some, CNP members — among the brightest lights of the

hard right — are up to no good.

The CNP meets this weekend at a Washington location known to fewer insiders than the identity

of the vice president's undisclosed chunk of bedrock.

Look for them if you're at a ritzy hotel in Tyson's Corner, Va.

Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas is the headliner. White House counsel Alberto Gonzales

will speak, as will Timothy Goeglein, deputy director of the White House Office of Public

Liaison. There have been no public announcements, and there won't be. The 500 or so members

will hear private, unvarnished presentations.

White House spokeswoman Anne Womack said Gonzales' remarks would not be released. The CNP's

bylaws keep out the press and prevent disclosure of the transcribed proceedings — unless all

the speakers give their assent. Few do.

In a 2000 filing with the Internal Revenue Service, the CNP says it holds "educational

conferences and seminars for national leaders in the field of business, government, religion

and academia." It says it produces a weekly newsletter keeping members abreast of

developments, and a biyearly collection of speeches. Executive Director Morton Blackwell was

paid a little more than $70,000. The organization took in more than $732,000.

Baldwin said he doesn't get many calls from the press. But he's happy to answer some basic

questions.

Of the group's reputation, he said, "There's a lot of stuff out there claiming we're a lot

more than we are."

What they are — or rather, what sway they hold — is a source of some dispute.

In 1999, candidate George W. Bush spoke before a closed-press CNP session in San Antonio. His

speech, contemporaneously described as a typical mid-campaign ministration to conservatives,

was recorded on audio tape.

(Depending on whose account you believe, Bush promised to appoint only anti-abortion-rights

judges to the Supreme Court, or he stuck to his campaign "strict constructionist" phrase. Or

he took a tough stance against gays and lesbians, or maybe he didn't).

The media and center-left activist groups urged the group and Bush's presidential campaign to

release the tape of his remarks. The CNP, citing its bylaws that restrict access to speeches,

declined. So did the Bush campaign, citing the CNP.

Shortly thereafter, magisterial conservatives pronounced the allegedly moderate younger Bush

fit for the mantle of Republican leadership.

The two events might not be connected. But since none of the participants would say what Bush

said, the CNP's kingmaking role mushroomed in the mind's eye, at least to the Democratic

National Committee, which urged release of the tapes.

Partly because so little was known about CNP, the hubbub died down.

The CNP Against Liberalism

The CNP describes itself as a counterweight against liberal domination of the American agenda.

That countering is heavy and silent, in part because few people, outside its members, seem to

know what the group is, what it does, how it raises money, and how interlocked it has become

in the matrix of conservative activism.

Conservative, it clearly is.

Unlike other groups that meet in darkened chambers, the CNP doesn't seem to favor, as a matter

of policy and choice of guests, one-worlders, secular humanists, or multicultural

multilateralists.

According to one of its most prominent members (who asked that his name not be used), the CNP

is simply and nothing but a self-selected, conservative counterweight to the influential

center-left establishment.

Panel topics at this year's convention hew to the CNP's world view, but Baldwin, who wouldn't

give specifics, said they reflected many different vantage points.

"We'll probably discuss some of the hot issues that are relevant today. The Middle East …

We'll have a number of speakers from different perspectives. We're not of all one like mind

when it comes to what's going on there."

He continued: "Worldwide terrorism. Campaign finance reform. Generally, we kind of mirror

what's going on in society. We pride ourselves on being relevant and timely, so that members

want to come to our meetings."

Still, the group's shadowy reputation deters some high-profile figures from speaking before it

— those who directly influence policy.

For example: A knowledgeable person lists former CIA Director James Woolsey as a Friday night

speaker and says that on Saturday, Reagan defense official Frank Gaffney will debate former

presidential candidate Pat Buchanan about Israel.

The cavalcade of "formers" resembles nothing more formidable than a Fox News prime-time guest

lineup.

In the 1990s, social issues tended to dominate the panels, and guests tended to be talking

heads who were plugged in to policy circles, rather than operating from within them.

The concoction of federalism, economic growth, social traditionalism, religious activism and

anti-secularism goes down well among members because it is spiced with disdain for a common

enemy: the creeping influence of political and philosophical liberalism.

Many current and former members politely said they would prefer not to speak on the

organization's behalf. Those who did respond to telephone and e-mail messages declined to talk

about their interest in the organization. More than a dozen did not respond at all.

"Obviously, membership would imply that there is a commonality, so that goes without saying,"

said Alvin Williams, CEO of a political action committee that promotes black conservatives. "I

don't think it is anything threatening at all."

He declined to elaborate.

Darla St. Martin, associate executive director of the National Right to Life, would only say,

"Since everyone else is so skeptical [about speaking], I don't think I should."

Even Judicial Watch's Larry Klayman, the watchdog and open government proponent, would not

comment, a spokesman said. His busy schedule — four depositions in two days — precluded a

short telephone interview.

Gary Bauer, the former presidential candidate and ubiquitous media presence, asked a spokesman

to decline a request for an interview about the CNP, citing the group's long-standing policy

against press publicity.

Judging by its 1998 membership roster, which was obtained by a secular watchdog group called

the Institute for First Amendment Studies and posted on its Web site, the New Right's many

colors are represented, but there are few, if any, neo-conservatives, Republican moderates and

libertarians.

Selective name dropping doesn't juice up a conspiracy. The evidence that the CNP is an axis of

nefarity is slim. Conservative groups are quick to point out that liberal watchdogs like

Common Cause have a great influence in public policy debates, and, for instance, a direct hand

in writing the campaign-finance legislation.

A New Force in the Age of Reagan

But even CNP backers claim that the liberal establishment has nothing comparable — no central

gathering of its powerful members.

The idea for CNP gestated since the late 1960s, when the American Right, aiming for more cake,

desired a vigorous voice to influence policy and elite opinion at the margins. Intellectuals

it had, but practical policy seminars were missing. The Moral Majority flashed into being

after Roe vs. Wade, but it was oriented toward Middle America, not to not-liberal Washington

power-brokers.

CNP was conceived in 1981 by at least five fathers, including the Rev. Tim LaHaye, an

evangelical preacher who was then the head of the Moral Majority. (LaHaye is the co-author of

the popular Left Behind series that predicts and subsequently depicts the Apocalypse). Nelson

Baker Hunt, billionaire son of billionaire oilman H.L. Hunt (connected to both the John Birch

Society and to Ronald Reagan's political network), businessman and one-time murder suspect T.

Cullen Davis, and wealthy John Bircher William Cies provided the seed money.

Top Republicans were quickly recruited to fill in the gaps; hard-right thinkers met up with

sympathetic politicians. And suddenly, the right had a counterpart to liberal policy groups.

Christian activist Paul Weyrich took responsibility for bringing together the best minds of

conservatism, and his imprint on the group's mission is unmistakable: It provided a forum for

religiously engaged conservative Christians to influence the geography of American political

power.

At its first meeting in May of 1981, the CNP gave an award to Reagan budget guru David

Stockman, strategized about judicial appointments, and reveled in its newness.

Since then, at thrice-yearly conventions, the CNP has functioned as a sausage factory for

conservative ideas of a particular goût: strong affirmations of military power, Christian

heritage, traditional values, and leave-us-alone-get-off-our-backs legislation. That red meat

is seasoned by groups like David Keene's American Conservative Union, researched and vetted by

conservative policy groups, chewed on and tested at statewide activist meetings.

There's no denying their influence: Money is transferred from benefactor to worthy cause.

Aspirants meet benefactors.

The CNP helped Christian conservatives take control of the Republican state party apparati in

Southern and Midwestern states. It helped to spread word about the infamous "Clinton

Chronicles" videotapes that linked the president to a host of crimes in Arkansas.

But the CNP is one factory among many. It stands out nowadays because it prefers not to stand

out.

Unlike, say, the Heritage Foundation, which has a media studio in its headquarters, or the

American Enterprise Institute, which publishes journals, the CNP is content to operate in the

alleyways of downtown Washington. Part of what keeps it so healthy, according to current

members, is the same penchant for secrecy that drives outsiders crazy.

As then-first lady Hillary Rodham Clinton prepared to tell NBC News' Katie Couric that her

husband was a victim of a "vast, right-wing conspiracy," a senior Clinton adviser asked Skipp

Porteous, then the head of a secular watchdog group, for information on the CNP. Porteous'

conclusions — "that this is a group that has the ideology, the money and the political backing

to cause social change in the United States" — became a part of the White House litany.

Such talk is an apparition, members say. Much ado about nothing.

CNP will forever be nothing more than a "comfortable place" for like-minded folks to

brainstorm, one member said.

"What they decided at one point was that people will simply feel more at ease," said another

member, Balint Vazsonyi, who joined the group in 1997. "It's certainly not for a political

reason. The views discussed here are among those you see on the television or when you open a

newspaper."

Vazsonyi, a concert pianist who writes a column syndicated by Knight-Ridder, said CNP gave him

a chance to meet people who shared his views.

"I knew very, very few people in the political world. I knew lots of musicians, but nobody in

politics. Then someone said to me, 'There's a place for people who are and have been

interested in what you're interested in, and you might like to be known by them.'

"That," he said, "was really the hook."

Quiet — Just the Way They Like It

CNP may simply be press-shy because of traditional qualms about the establishment media's

secular, often politically liberal perspective, and because "they attribute things that

individual members may do to us," Baldwin says.

The London Guardian linked arch-conservative gun-rights activist Larry Pratt with Attorney

General John Aschroft by saying "the two men know each another from a secretive but highly

influential right-wing religious group called the Council for National Policy."

More recently, when California gubernatorial candidate Bill Simon disclosed his campaign's

contributors, The Associated Press made sure to note that four members of CNP had donated to

Simon's campaign — as if conservatives donating to conservatives was worthy of a news story

all its own. (Simon's father, the former treasury secretary, was a CNP member).

Other CNP press leaks have been less the product of liberal media snooping than of internal

jockeying. When James Dobson, president of Focus on the Family, told a CNP gathering in 1998

that he was thinking of withdrawing support for the Republican Party, rival conservative

leaders made sure the national media got word of the speech.

The CNP remains obscure. Experienced Washingtonians often mistake them for another

organization, the liberal Center for National Policy. The Washington Times reported Jan. 23

that Sen. John Kerry spoke to the Council for National Policy about AWNR drilling, when, in

fact, the Massachusetts Democrat spoke to the Center for National Policy, a very different

organization. Both the Council and Center are not to be confused with the Center for Budget

and Policy Priorities. Or the National Center for Policy Analysis.

Porteous' group, The Institute for First Amendment Studies, posted the CNP's roster on its Web

site and managed to slip past security at several CNP meetings throughout the 1990s and soon

published details notes of the proceedings.

If their summaries are reliable — and the IFAS swears they are — the from-the-fly-on-the-wall

thrill and the occasional agitated quotation for Democratic opposition research files do

little to sustain the belief that the CNP is ruling America behind those French doors of the

Fairfax hotel conference rooms.

"There's nothing wrong with what they are doing," Porteous said. "It's just that they're

ultraconservative and a lot of people don't agree with that."

"I don't think they are out there pounding their chests," said Joel Kaplan, a Syracuse

University journalism professor who has studied CNP's ties to conservative projects. "But I

don't think that they're hiding either."

Quote:

http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstra...A10894DC404482
Club of the Most Powerful Gathers in Strictest Privacy
David D. Kirkpatrick. New York Times. New York, N.Y.: Aug 28, 2004. pg. A.10

Three times a year for 23 years, a little-known club of a few hundred of the most powerful

conservatives in the country have met behind closed doors at undisclosed locations for a

confidential conference, the Council for National Policy, to strategize about how to turn the

country to the right.

Details are closely guarded.

''The media should not know when or where we meet or who takes part in our programs, before of

after a meeting,'' a list of rules obtained by The New York Times advises the attendees.

The membership list is ''strictly confidential.'' Guests may attend ''only with the unanimous

approval of the executive committee.'' In e-mail messages to one another, members are

instructed not to refer to the organization by name, to protect against leaks.

This week, before the Republican convention, the members quietly convened in New York, holding

their latest meeting almost in plain sight, at the Plaza Hotel, for what a participant called

''a pep rally'' to re-elect President Bush.

Mr. Bush addressed the group in fall 1999 to solicit support for his campaign, stirring a

dispute when news of his speech leaked and Democrats demanded he release a tape recording. He

did not.

Not long after the Iraq invasion, Vice President Dick Cheney and Defense Secretary Donald H.

Rumsfeld attended a council meeting.

This week, as the Bush campaign seeks to rally Christian conservative leaders to send

Republican voters to the polls, several Bush administration and campaign officials were on

hand, according to an agenda obtained by The New York Times.

''The destiny of our nation is on the shoulders of the conservative movement,'' the Senate

majority leader, Bill Frist, Republican of Tennessee, told the gathering as he accepted its

Thomas Jefferson award on Thursday, according to an attendee's notes.

The secrecy that surrounds the meeting and attendees like the Rev. Jerry Falwell, Phyllis

Schlafly and the head of the National Rifle Association, among others, makes it a subject of

suspicion, at least in the minds of the few liberals aware of it.

''The real crux of this is that these are the genuine leaders of the Republican Party, but

they certainly aren't going to be visible on television next week,'' Barry W. Lynn, executive

director of Americans United for Separation of Church and State, said.

Mr. Lynn was referring to the list of moderate speakers like Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger of

California and former Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani of New York who are scheduled to speak at the

convention.

''The C.N.P. members are not going to be visible next week,'' he said. ''But they are very

much on the minds of George W. Bush and Karl Rove every week of the year, because these are

the real powers in the party.''

A spokesman for the White House, Trent Duffy, said: ''The American people are quite clear and

know what the president's agenda is. He talks about it every day in public forums, not to any

secret group of conservatives or liberals. And he will be talking about his agenda on national

television in less than a week.''

The administration and re-election effort were major focuses of the group's meeting on

Thursday and yesterday. Under Secretary of State John Bolton spoke about plans for Iran, a

spokesman for the State Department said.

Likewise, a spokesman for Assistant Attorney General R. Alexander Acosta confirmed that Mr.

Acosta had addressed efforts to stop ''human trafficking,'' a major issue among Christian

conservatives.

Dr. Frist spoke about supporting Mr. Bush and limiting embryonic stem cell research, two

attendees said. Dan Senor, who recently returned from Iraq after working as a spokesman for L.

Paul Bremer III, the top American civilian administrator, was scheduled to provide an update

on the situation there.

Among presentations on the elections, an adviser to Mr. Bush's campaign, Ralph Reed, spoke on

''The 2004 Elections: Who Will Win in November?,'' attendees said.

The council was founded in 1981, just as the modern conservative movement began its

ascendance. The Rev. Tim LaHaye, an early Christian conservative organizer and the

best-selling author of the ''Left Behind'' novels about an apocalyptic Second Coming, was a

founder. His partners included Paul Weyrich, another Christian conservative political

organizer who also helped found the Heritage Foundation.

They said at the time that they were seeking to create a Christian conservative alternative to

what they believed was the liberalism of the Council on Foreign Relations.

A statement of its mission distributed this week said the council's purposes included ''to

acquaint our membership with those in positions of leadership in our nation in order that

mutual respect be fostered'' and ''to encourage the exchange of information concerning the

methodology of working within the system to promote the values and ends sought by individual

members.''

Membership costs several thousand dollars a year, a participant said. Its executive director,

Steve Baldwin, did not return a phone call.

Over the years, the council has become a staging ground for conservative efforts to make the

Republican Party more socially conservative. Ms. Schlafly, who helped build a grass-roots

network to fight for socially conservative positions in the party, is a longstanding member.

At times, the council has also seen the party as part of the problem. In 1998, Dr. James

Dobson of Focus on the Family spoke at the council to argue that Republicans were taking

conservatives for granted. He said he voted for a third-party candidate in 1996.

Opposition to same-sex marriage was a major conference theme. Although conservatives and Bush

campaign officials have denied seeking to use state ballot initiatives that oppose same-sex

marriage as a tool to bring out conservative voters, the agenda includes a speech on ''Using

Conservative Issues in Swing States,'' said Phil Burress, leader of an initiative drive in

Ohio, a battleground state.

The membership list this year was a who's who of evangelical Protestant conservatives and

their allies, including Dr. Dobson, Mr. Weyrich, Holland H. Coors of the beer dynasty; Wayne

LaPierre of the National Riffle Association, Richard A. Viguerie of American Target

Advertising, Mark Mix of the National Right to Work Committee and Grover Norquist of Americans

for Tax Reform.

Not everyone present was a Bush supporter, however. This year, the council included speeches

by Michael Badnarik of the Libertarian Party and Michael A. Peroutka of the ultraconservative

Constitution Party. About a quarter of the members attended their speeches, an attendee said.

Nor was the gathering all business. On Wednesday, members had a dinner in the Rainbow Room,

where William F. Buckley Jr. of the National Review was a special guest. At 10 p.m. on

Thursday and Friday, members had ''prayer sessions'' in the Rose Room at the hotel.

Quote:

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/15/wa...f1dba5&ei=5088
Conservative Christians Warn Republicans Against Inaction
David D. Kirkpatrick. New York Times. New York, N.Y.: May 15, 2006. pg. A.1

Some of President Bush's most influential conservative Christian allies are becoming openly critical of the White House and Republicans in Congress, warning that they will withhold their support in the midterm elections unless Congress does more to oppose same-sex marriage, obscenity and abortion.

''There is a growing feeling among conservatives that the only way to cure the problem is for Republicans to lose the Congressional elections this fall,'' said Richard Viguerie, a conservative direct-mail pioneer.

Mr. Viguerie also cited dissatisfaction with government spending, the war in Iraq and the immigration-policy debate, which Mr. Bush is scheduled to address in a televised speech on Monday night.

''I can't tell you how much anger there is at the Republican leadership,'' Mr. Viguerie said. ''I have never seen anything like it.''

In the last several weeks, Dr. James C. Dobson, founder of Focus on the Family and one of the most influential Christian conservatives, has publicly accused Republican leaders of betraying the social conservatives who helped elect them in 2004. He has also warned in private meetings with about a dozen of the top Republicans in Washington that he may turn critic this fall unless the party delivers on conservative goals.

And at a meeting in Northern Virginia this weekend of the Council for National Policy, an alliance of the most prominent Christian conservatives, several participants said sentiment toward the White House and Republicans in Congress had deteriorated sharply since the 2004 elections.

When the group met in the summer of 2004, it resembled a pep rally for Mr. Bush and his allies on Capitol Hill, and one session focused on how to use state initiatives seeking to ban same-sex marriage to help turn out the vote. This year, some participants are complaining that as soon as Mr. Bush was re-elected he stopped expressing his support for a constitutional amendment banning such unions.

Christian conservative leaders have often threatened in the months before an election to withhold their support for Republicans in an effort to press for their legislative goals. In the 1990's, Dr. Dobson in particular became known for his jeremiads against the Republican party, most notably in the months before the 1998 midterm elections.

But the complaints this year are especially significant because they underscore how the broad decline in public approval for Mr. Bush and Congressional Republicans is beginning to cut into their core supporters. The threatened defections come just two years after many Christian conservatives -- most notably Dr. Dobson -- abandoned much of their previous reservations and poured energy into electing Republicans in 2004.

Dr. Dobson gave his first presidential endorsement to Mr. Bush and held get-out-the-vote rallies that attracted thousands of admirers in states with pivotal Senate races while Focus on the Family and many of its allies helped register voters in conservative churches.

Republican officials, who were granted anonymity to speak publicly because of the sensitivity of the situation, acknowledged the difficult political climate but said they planned to rally conservatives by underscoring the contrast with Democrats and emphasizing the recent confirmations of two conservatives to the Supreme Court.

Midterm Congressional elections tend to be won by whichever side can motivate more true believers to vote. Dr. Dobson and other conservatives are renewing their complaints about the Republicans at a time when several recent polls have shown sharp declines in approval among Republicans and conservatives. And compared with other constituencies, evangelical Protestants have historically been suspicious of the worldly business of politics and thus more prone to stay home unless they feel clear moral issues are at stake.

''When a president is in a reasonably strong position, these kind of leaders don't have a lot of leverage,'' said Charlie Cook, a nonpartisan political analyst. ''But when the president is weak, they tend to have a lot of leverage.''

Dr. Dobson, whose daily radio broadcast has millions of listeners, has already signaled his willingness to criticize Republican leaders. In a recent interview with Fox News on the eve of a visit to the White House, he accused Republicans of ''just ignoring those that put them in office.''

Dr. Dobson cited the House's actions on two measures that passed over the objections of social conservatives: a hate-crime bill that extended protections to gay people, and increased support for embryonic stem cell research.

''There's just very, very little to show for what has happened,'' Dr. Dobson said, ''and I think there's going to be some trouble down the road if they don't get on the ball.''

According to people who were at the meetings or were briefed on them, Dr. Dobson has made the same point more politely in a series of private conversations over the last two weeks in meetings with several top Republicans, including Karl Rove, the president's top political adviser; Senator Bill Frist of Tennessee, the Republican leader; Representative J. Dennis Hastert of Illinois, the House speaker; and Representative John A. Boehner of Ohio, the majority leader.

''People are getting concerned that they have not seen some of these issues move forward that were central to the 2004 election,'' said Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, who attended the meetings.

Richard D. Land, a top official of the Southern Baptist Convention who has been one of Mr. Bush's most loyal allies, said in an interview last week that many conservatives were upset that Mr. Bush had not talked more about a constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage.

''A lot of people are disappointed that he hasn't put as much effort into the marriage amendment as he did for the prescription drug benefit or Social Security reform,'' Dr. Land said.

Republicans say they are taking steps to revive their support among Christian conservatives. On Thursday night, Mr. Rove made the case for the party at a private meeting of the Council for National Policy, participants said.

In addition to reminding conservatives of the confirmations of Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. to the Supreme Court, party strategists say the White House and Senate Republicans are escalating their fights against the Democrats over conservative nominees to lower federal courts, and the Senate is set to revive the same-sex marriage debate next month with a vote on the proposed amendment.

But it is unclear how much Congressional Republicans will be able to do for social conservatives before the next election.

No one expects the same-sex marriage amendment to pass this year. Republican leaders have not scheduled votes on a measure to outlaw transporting minors across state lines for abortions, and the proposal faces long odds in the Senate. A measure to increase obscenity fines for broadcasters is opposed by media industry trade groups, pitting Christian conservatives against the business wing of the party, and Congressional leaders have not committed to bring it to a vote.

Grover Norquist, president of Americans for Tax Reform and another frequent participant in the Council for National Policy, argued that Christian conservatives were hurting their own cause.

''If the Republicans do poorly in 2006,'' Mr. Norquist said, ''the establishment will explain that it was because Bush was too conservative, specifically on social and cultural issues.''

Dr. Dobson declined to comment. His spokesman, Paul Hetrick, said that Dr. Dobson was ''on a fact-finding trip to see where Republicans are regarding the issues that concern values voters most, especially the Marriage Protection Act,'' and that it was too soon to tell the results.