Ethics & Integrity in Action

WASHINGTON - Republican Tom Kean Jr.'s campaign plans a "Swift Boat"-style film accusing his Democratic rival of involvement in a New Jersey mob-connected kickback scheme despite public records and statements disputing that claim.

Sen. Bob Menendez has talked about how he courageously testified against Union City, N.J., Mayor William V. Musto in a 1982 federal trial that dealt with school construction, kickbacks and the Mob.

Musto was convicted and sentenced to seven years in prison. He died in February.

Kean contends that Menendez's portrayal of his role is inaccurate. Four former federal prosecutors who oversaw the case have said Menendez was never involved in any wrongdoing.

The Kean campaign has acknowledged the prosecutors' statements, but spokeswoman Jill Hazelbaker said Friday, "The corruption is so deep and so extensive it requires a film to capture all of it."

She said the film covers Menendez's political career, from his work in Musto's administration, his years as Union City mayor to his time as a congressman and senator.

The campaign plans a film similar to the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth ads from the 2004 presidential campaign. Then, a group of Vietnam War veterans made unsubstantiated allegations about Democratic Sen. John Kerry's decorated war record.

Hazelbaker said the campaign wants voters to know that Menendez went to work for Musto "with his eyes wide open" amid questions about Musto's integrity.

The issue arose during two Senate debates last week. Kean ignored questions from Menendez and reporters at the debates about his involvement in a "Swift Boat" style film, but the campaign said it was funding it in an interview with The New York Times.

Menendez spokesman Matt Miller said public records prove that the senator was not involved in the Musto probe, or in any other wrongdoing.

"Tom Kean Jr. has failed the most basic test of integrity, which is whether you're willing to tell the truth," Miller said. "How many times do his lies have to be exposed before he stops telling them?"

Aging Wine and Deciding when to bottle

Ok, Vino fans. Time to take a break from Political discussions.

Aging wine in Oak barrels. Barrels have an effective life of about 5 years where they impart some Oak flavoring. After this time period the Barrels become "neutral". Still useful for aging, and Oak character is not added. There are other mechanisms to add Oak characteristics. Some vintners when fermenting grapes in stainless steel vats, will add Oak staves. The heat of the fermentation extracts out the Oak quickly. Nuetral barrel can be reconditioned, ie, take the end cap off, and then have the interior scraped, sanded and refired. This is labor intensive, and adds maybe two more years of effective Oak flavor addition.

Another options is to add Oak Beans (small round or square pieces of Oak, fired and toasted) to nuetral Oak barrels, or it doing long term aging in stainless steel, or glass, Oak beans/chips can be added.

Deciding when to bottle wine is a matter of taste, and chemistry. Chemistry is the most important piece because it ensures future stability of the wine once its in the bottle. A by product of fermentation is the formation of Malic Acid. Malic acid will naturally breakdown, or convert over time into other compounds. This can take a long time, up to 18 months in an Oak Barrel. A mechanism to accelerate this activity is adding a Malolactic bacterial culture to the wine toward the end of fermentation. Doing so converts the Malic acid much more quickly, in a few weeks. Doing so "softens" the wine. A chardonnay that has Malolactic culture added will produce a buttery element, if "Malo" is not added, then not all of the Malic Acid is converted, and the wine ends up with a sharper edge.

Aside from the chemistry angle it's a matter of taste. It's hard to describe how much a wine changes taste in a barrel over time. All I can tell you is that every month, the wine changes in flavor noticably. Even if I have a brand new barrel, I will still leave the wine on Oak for 9 months before bottling. I have gone as long as two years. It just depends upon the wine.

More and more though, my decision is being driven by storage capacity. Each Fall I harvest the grapes in September or early October. Fermentation, pressing, racking, etc, takes about 6 weeks. Once the wine is ready to be moved to Oak barrels I have to have available space in the barrels to move the new wine in. So, now I typically bottle the prior years harvest, the week before I move the new wine in. This allows me time to clean out the old barrel, treat it properly, and get it ready for the next batch. Cleaning is important because tartrates can build up on the interior of the barrel, creating a film that inhibits the barrel from imparting it's precious Oak flavoring. The cleaning exercise is simple. Once the wine is pumped out for bottling, the barrel is then repeatedly rinsed with water with a high pressure nozzle, especially designed to work inside a barrel. After each rinsing the barrel is drained. In between you just peek inside with a flashlight to look around. The interior of the barrel can be scraped with a barrel brush as well. Once this is done, then a solution of Citric Acid and water is poured into the barrel and rolled around. This also helps clean the interior and treat the wood. Lastly, a solution of water and Sulfur Dioxide is added, and rolled around. This will kill any airborn bacteria, and especially it is important to kill any airborne bacteria that produced vinegar. If this bacteria gets into the interior of a barrel the barrel is forever ruined.

All of the 2005 harvest was moved into Oak in late October, and early November. The first bottling will occur in early July. Which will mean that wine (my Estate Cabernet) will have had about 8 - 9 months of Oak contact). My taste buds say it's ready. It still has a strong fruit component which I don't want to lose.

hunt them down

The group responsible for eviscerating our two young soldiers, need to be hunted down like animals. No mercy.

Here a Nut, there a Nut, everywhere a Wingnut

Yes, old Sleepster happens to live in a County that is a hotbed of Wingnuttery. The local Wingnut Central Committee wields their power with an iron fist. Yes, Congressman Doolittle, did win this round vs Holmes, the upstart Auburn Mayor, but it took tons of money to "buy" the election. Dolittle garned 64% of the vote, quite impressive. Holmes got but 36% of the vote. The telling point is that those votes for Dolittle required fund raising to the tune of $975K+, and a supporting visit from Deadeye Dick for fundraising purposes. Yes Holmes only raised $84K. Let's
add this up, Holmes 36%->$84K, Doolittle 64%->$975K. Ok, my Math is off a bit. I keep forgetting to mention Mrs. Doolittle does skim off 15% of the funds for her commission as chairperson in charge of managing fundraisers, and paying the household expenses. That's a tidy $146K for the family coffers.

Still there is a crack in the armor. This County is trying to groom a replacement for Mr. D. As his act is wearing thin with his constituents. The Wingnut faithful were quite vocal this past election voicing their complaints in multiple forums. Mr. D's handpicked successor, Jerry Simmons, got a serious whuppin' at the polls. Supervisor Weygandt, a lifelong Republican, wasn't extreme, or Wingnuttery enough for the Republican Central committee. Plus he was just happy serving his County as a Supervisor, and had no designs to pursue a Congressman job. That's where Jerry Simmon's came in. He received the full endorsement from the Central Committee for the Supervisor job, even though Weygandt was the Republican incumbent. Weygandt has been a Republican longer than Simmon's has been alive. Clearly a slap in the face to this loyal party supporter and a long time public servant.

Simmons spent in excess of $500K for a Supervisor job! Probably a $100K more than Weygandt.

The voters have spoken, and Weygandt won by a landslide. The voters also killed a key bond measure, and also killed a measure that would have helped the salary scale for local hard working, Deputy Sheriffs. Simmons was closely tied to both of these related measures.

Our Buddy RC, aka, Sgt CRA, was Simmons campaign manager.

So what happened to Jerry Simmons? Well, he was just kicked off the Wingnut Central Committee, and publicly blamed by the Wingnut Committee President in the paper as being at fault for the Bond failure and the pay measure for the Sheriffs. His reward, is that he is done in this County, a has been at 32.

Come November, Doolittle has to take on Charlie Brown. Not Charles Brown, or Chuck Brown, but the one and only Charlie Brown, a retired, Lt. Colonel, who just happens to be a Democrat. Doolittle, a chickenhawk, and hasn't been within stones throw of a military boot camp in his life, now has to figure out how to demean and belittle a Military Veteran before the polls open on November 7th.

We'll also have to see how many more campaign dollars are raised, and end up in uh, Mrs. Doolittles pockets for services rendered.

I'm sure as well, that being a devout Mormon, he is tithing 15% of the family take (Wink, Wink).