During the heat of the senate campaign, Bush's redistricting lawsuit had progressed in a way that must have provided him much
solace amidst the bitterness of his defeat. When Bush won his suit in the Houston federal district court, there was a loud
squawk from Governor John Connally, who called that august tribunal as a "Republican court." Bush whined that Connally was
being "vitriolic." During Bush's primary campaign, a three-judge panel of the federal circuit court of appeals had ruled that the
state of Texas must be redistricted. Bush called that result "a real victory for all the people of Texas." By March, Bush's
redistricting suit had received favorable action by the US Supreme Court. This meant that the way was clear to create a
no-incumbent, designer district for George in a masterpiece of gerrymandering that would make him an elected official, the first
Republican Congressman in the recent history of the Houston area. 

The new Seventh District was drawn to create a liberal Republican seat, carefully taking into account which areas Bush had
succeeded in carrying in the senate race. What emerged was for the most part a lilly-white, silk-stocking district of the affluent
upper middle and upper crust. There were also small black and Hispanic enclaves. In the precinct boxes of the new district,
Bush had rolled up an eight to five margin over Yarborough. [fn 1] 

But before gearing up a Congressional campaign in the Seventh District in 1966, Bush first had to jettison some of the useless
ideological ballast he had taken on for his 1964 Goldwater profile. During the 1964 campaign, Bush had spoken out more
frankly and more bluntly on a series of political issues than he ever has before or since. Apart from the Goldwater coloration,
one comes away with the impression that much of the time the speeches were not just inventions, but often reflected his own
oligarchical instincts and deeply-rooted obsessions. In late 1964 and early 1965, Bush was afflicted by a hangover induced by
what for him had been an unprecedented orgy of self-revelation. 

The 1965-66 model George Bush would become a moderate, abandoning the shrillest notes of the 1964 conservative crusade.

First came an Episcopalian mea culpa. As Bush's admirer Fitzhugh Green reports, "one of his first steps was to shuck off a
bothersome trace from his 1964 campaign. He had espoused some conservative ideas that didn't jibe with his own moderate
attitude." Previous statements were becoming inoperative, one gathers, when Bush discussed the matter with his Anglican
pastor, John Stevens. "You know, John," said Bush, "I took some of the far right positions to get elected. I hope I never do it
again. I regret it." His radical stance on the Civil Rights bill was allegedly a big part of his "regret." Stevens later commented: "I
suspect that his goal on civil rights was the same as mine: it's just that he wanted to go through the existing authorities to attain it.
In that way nothing would get done. Still, he represents about the best of noblesse oblige." [fn 2] 

It was characteristically through an attempted purge in the Harris County GOP organization that Bush signalled that he was
reversing his field. His gambit here was to call on party activists to take an "anti -extremist and anti-intolerance pledge," as the
Houston Chronicle reported on May 26, 1965. [fn 3] Bush attacked unnamed apostles of "guilt by association" and "far-out
fear psychology, and his pronouncements touched off a bitter and protracted row in the Houston GOP. Bush made clear that
he was targetting the John Birch Society, whose activists he had been eager to lure into his own 1964 effort. Now Bush beat up
on the Birchers as a way to correct his right-wing profile from the year before. Bush said with his usual tortured syntax that
Birch members claim to "abhor smear and slander and guilt by association, but how many of them speak out against it
publicly?" 

This was soon followed by a Bush-inspired move to oust Bob Gilbert, who had been Bush's successor as the GOP county
chairman during the Goldwater period. Bush's retainers put out the line that the "extremists" had been gaining too much power
under Gilbert, and that he therefore must go. The Bush faction by now had enough clout to oust Gilbert on June 12, 1965. The
eminence grise of the right-wing faction, State senator Walter Mengdon, told the press that the ouster of Gilbert had been
dictated by Bush. Bush whined in response that he was very disappointed with Mengdon. "I have stayed out of county politics.
I believed all Republicans had backed my campaign," Bush told the Houston Chronicle on the day Gilbert fell. 

On July 1 the Houston papers reported the election of a new, "anti- extremist" Republican county leader. This was James M.
Mayor, who defeated James Bowers by a margin of 95 votes against 80 in the county executive committee. Mayor was
endorsed by Bush, as well as by Senator Tower. Bowers was an auctioneer who called for a return to the Goldwater "magic."
GOP state chair O'Donnell hoped that the new chairman would be able to put an end to "the great deal of dissension within the
party in Harris County for several years." Despite this pious wish, acrimonious faction fighting tore the county organization to
pieces over the next several years. At one point the Ripon Society, a nationwide liberal Republican grouping which claimed to
be part of a moderating rebuilding effort after the Goldwater debacle, intervened in the county to protect Mayor against the
right-wing opposition. In so doing, the Ripon Society was also intervening in favor of Bush. The Ripon people pointed to the
guerilla warfare against Mayor as "another demonstration of the persistent strength of the far right within the Texas GOP."
Shortly after this scaramouche, the dissident faction of the Harris County GOP controlled 87 of 189 precinct chairs. 

But at the same time Bush took care to police his left flank, distancing himself from the beginnings of the movement against the
war in Vietnam which had been visible by the middle of 1965. A remarkable document of this manuever is the text of the
debate between Bush and Ronnie Dugger, the writer and editor of the Texas Observer. The debate was held July 1, 1965
before the Junior Bar of Texas convention in Fort Worth. Dugger had endorsed Bush--in a way Dugger said was "not without
whimsical intent" in the GOP senate primary the year before. Dugger was no radical; at this point was not really against the
Vietnam war, and he actually endorsed the policy of LBJ, saying that the President had "no easy way out of Viet Nam, but he is
seeking and seeking hard for an honorable way out." [fn 4] Nevertheless, Dugger found that LBJ had made a series of mistakes
in the implementation of his policy. Dugger also embraced the provisos advanced by Senator Fulbright to the effect that
"seeking a complete military victory would cost more than the requirements of our interest and honor." So Dugger argued
against any further escalation, and argued that anti-war demonstrations and civil disobedience could be beneficial. 

Bush's first real cause for alarm was seeing "the civil rights movement being made over into a massive vehicle with which to
attack the President's foreign policy in Vietnam." He started by attacking Conrad Lynn, a "Negro lawyer" who had told
students at "my old university- Yale University" - that "The United States white supremacists' army has been sent to suppress
the non-white people of the world." According to Bush "The Yale Daily News reported that the audience applauded when
[Lynn] annunced that several Negroes had gone to Asia to enlist in the North Viet Nam army to fight against the United States."
Then Bush turned to his real target, Martin Luther King. King, he said, who is "identified with the freedom of the Negro cause,
says in Boston the other day that he doesn't want to sit at a segregated lunch counter where you have strontium 90 in the milk,
overlooking the fact that it's the communists who are testing in the atmosphere today, the Red Chinese. It's not the United
States." Then there was Bayard Rustin, "a leading individual in the Negro struggle for freedom, [who] calls for withdrawal from
Viet Nam." This is all hypocritical in Bush's view, since "they talk about civil rights in this country, but they are willing to sacrifice
the individual rights in the communist countries." 

Bush was equally riled up over anti-war demonstrations, since they were peopled by what he called "extremists:" "I am sure you
know what an extremist is. That's a guy who takes a good idea and carries it to simply preposterous ends. And that's what's
happened. Of course, the re-emergence of the political beatnik is causing me personally a good deal of pleasure. Many
conservatives winced during 1964 as we were labelled extremists of the right. And certainly we were embarrassed by the
booing of Nelson Rockefeller at the convention, and some of the comments that referred to the smell of fascism in the air at the
Republican convention, and things like this, and we winced." 

Warming to the subject, Bush continued: "Let me give you some examples of this kind of left wing extremism. Averell
Harriman-- surely not known for his reactionary views-- speaking at Cornell University, talking about Viet Nam before a
crowd that calls "Liar!" [They] booed him to the state he could hardly finish, and finally he got so frustrated he asked, 'How
many in the audience are communists?' And a bunch of people there --small I will admit--held up their hands." 

So extremists, for Bush, were those who assailed Rockefeller and Harriman. 

Bush defended the House Committe on Unamerican Activities against the demonstrations organized by James Foreman and
SNCC, commiserated with a State Department official who had been branded a fascist at Iowa State, and went on to assail the
Berkeley "filthy speech" movement. As an example of the "pure naivete" of civil rights leaders, he cited Coretta Scott King who
"managed to link global peace and civil rights, somehow managed to tie these two things together philosophically" -- which
Bush professed not to fathom. "If we can be non-violent in Selma, why can't we be non-violent in Viet Nam," Ossie Davis had
said, and Bush proposed he be awarded the "green Wiener" for his "absurd theory," for "what's got to be the fuzziest thinking of
the year." 

Beyond this inevitable obsession with race, Bush was frankly a hawk, frankly for escalation, opening the door to nuclear
weapons in Viet Nam only a little more subtly than he had the year before: "And so I stand here as one who says I will back up
the President and military leaders no matter what weapons they use in Southeast Asia." 

During 1964, 1965 and 1966, Bush was still functioning as the full- time president of Zapata Offshore, although some of his
co-workers complained that he was even less single-minded about making money. During this period, the company's
operations were rapidly expanding and LeTourneau's Vicksburg yard turned out a series of offshore drilling platforms, including
some of new design. Business had been good during 1964, with net income up 85% over the previous year. Bush wrote in the
1964 Zapata Petroleum Annual Report: "The offshore drilling industry in which we operate continues strong and active, with
virtually all equipment in the Gulf of Mexico employed 100% of the time. Furthermore, other market around the world are
active, and new markets are opening up." 

The latest LeTourneau drilling platform was the MAVERICK, which was at that time the largest self-elevating drilling barge in
action anywhere in the world. The self-elevating barges were mobile rigs with legs that rested on the bottom of the ocean. "The
maximum depth of water in which self-elevating barges can work is limited by the length of their legs," Bush reminded the
shareholders. Maverick went to work for the California Company. The MAVERICK design was so promising, Bush told the
shareholders, that Zapata had completed negotiations to build two new rigs of the MAVERICK class," which would go to
work for Shell. Gulf oil was also anxious to hire one of Zapata's new rigs. 

The SCORPION, which had been the first of the self-elevating mobile barges, spent 1964 off the coast of Lousiana, under
contract to Shell oil. The VINEGAROON spent the first half of the year off Trinidad, and then moved to a position off the
coast of Louisiana. The SIDEWINDER, Zapata's ship-shaped floating drilling vessel, had been towed by Royal Dutch Shell's
Brunei Shell Petroleum Compnay Ltd. to a position off the sultanate of Brunei on the north coast of Borneo. Bush wrote in the
1964 Zapata annual report that "Brunei Shell Petroleum Compnay, Ltd., has notified your company of Shell's intention to
exercise its option, contained in the drilling contract, to purchase the SIDEWINDER. Money derived from the sale of
SIDEWINDER will be used to defray part of the cost of the new rigs. Shell plans to move the SIDEWINDER to the Persian
Gulf where Seacat-Zapata, our Persian Gulf affiliate, will operate the SIDEWINDER with another Shell subsidiary." 

Among the older rigs, the NOLA I, the World War II freighter hull with a drilling apparatus built in, was now considered
obsolete. The NOLA I was sold to a Mexican drilling company, presumably one connected to Diaz Serrano or one of his
corporate fronts. The NOLA III, which had been sold in 1961 to Zapata-Seacat Offshore Company, one of Bush's
subsidiaries, was still active in the "relatively calm waters" of the Persian Gulf. "During 1964, NOLA III worked for Kuwait
Shell Petroleum Development Company and Continental Oil Company," Bush wrote in his 1964 annual report. So the Sultan of
Brunei and the Emir of Kuweit were indeed Bush's business partners. 

The Zapata fleet of drilling rigs was undergoing continuous modernization, with the ship-shaped floating rigs being phased out in
favor of the self-elevating drilling platforms. In 1964, three of Zapata's five rigs were ship-shaped floaters, but by 1966, Bush
wrote, only the NOLA III would remain active in this class. One threat to the Zapata fleet was posed by the hurricanes in the
Gulf: in 1964 hurricane Hilda had done some damage to SCORPION, VINEGAROON, and the new MAVERICK. 

Surveying the world market for drilling rigs, Bush pointed out that "discoveries off the coast of Nigeria are drawing rigs to that
area." There was also the recent discovery of oil in the North Sea, with the result that, "during the summer, the United Kingdom
leased a vast area off its east coast for offshore exploration." "Most of the world's major oil companies are investing heavily in
the North Sea," Bush observed. There was also the Persian Gulf, where "a major lease sale off the Northern Coast of the
Persian Gulf is being completed by the Iranian government as this report goes to press." "All of these developments are
expected to have a beneficial effect on Zapata's business over the next several years," Bush concluded. 

In 1965, Bush was able to boast in his last Zapata Annual Report that earnings per share had risen for the sixth year out of the
seven of his tenure. One severe setback had been the destruction of the MAVERICK platform by Hurricane Betsy in the Gulf.
But Bush was able to reassure the shareolders: "I am pleased to note that within three weeks of Hurricane Betsy, your
company had been paid the full value by the insurance companies. The coverage was carried with Lloyds of London and British
Insurance Companies, and the offshore drilling business should be grateful for the way in which these companies have
responded when disaster has struck." 

Bush's world offshore drilling market survey now included the coast of Nigera, the Iranian leases in the northern Persian Gulf,
Austrialian off-shore fields then opening up, the Gulf of Suez, and the beginning of drilling in the North Sea fields by both Britain
and Norway. Zapata, said Bush, was keeping in close contact with British Petroleum, Continental, and Shell. On the world oil
market overall, Bush quoted John Loudon, the senior managing director of the Royal Dutch Shell Group as saying that in 25
years the free world was going to require three times the current amount of oil for its consumption. 

Later, the SIDEWINDER completed its trip from the Sultan of Brunei's domains off the coast of northern Borneo, and began
operating in the Persian Gulf. But to replace SIDEWINDER, Southeastern-Zaapata Drlling, a one-third owned affiliate, had
built a new rig in Japan at a cost of some $6.5 million, and this rig had been moved to the Borneo coast under contract to Shell.
Seacat Zapata's NOLA III had left the Persian Gulf and was now operating in the Gulf of Tunis, whence it would proceed to
the Red Sea coast of Ethiopia. VINEGAROON was working off the coast of Louisiana for Chevron, and a new rig, tentatively
labelled RIG 8, was also destined for the Gulf of Mexico. Opportunities seemed imminent in Australia, where Zapata had set
up a special relationship with Oil Drilling and Exploration Ltd. of Australia. 

In 1966, the year that Bush says he left the management of Zapata to devote himself full-time to politics, Zapata experienced
another increase in earnings per share. According to the 1966 Zapata Annual Report, Zapata's "net profits for 1966 exceeded
the net profits of several Fortune 500 companies." The value of Zapata's offshore drilling fleet was an estimated $34 million,
and the company's stock was now trading on the American Stock Exchange. With departure of George H.W. Bush as
chairman of the board, the corporate personalities of Zapata underwent a shakeup. Along with Bush departed his maternal
Uncle Herbie, aka G.H. Walker Jr., the Managing Director of G.H. Walker and Co., New York. J.W. Gardner was out as
president, replaced by William H. Flynn. The new chairman of the board and chief executive officer was now D. Doyle Mize,
who had previously been a member of the board. The Underwood, Neuhaus Co. interests kept their seat on the Zapata board,
but their representative changed from Milton R. Underwood to William Stamps Farrish III, Bush's Beeville hunting partner and
the grandson of the Standard Oil executive who had been exposed for dealing with Nazi firms. Added to the board were also
two representatives of leading Houston law firms, including R.P. Bushman of Vinson, Elkins, Weems, and Searls and B.J.
Mackin of Baker, Botts, Shepherd and Coates. Judging from the presence of Farrish and the Houston lawyers, we may
conclude that although Bush had departed from the formal structure of Zapata, he still had board members to represent his
interests, which was important in light of the Zapata stock he continued to hold. The sole New Yorker on the post-Bush board
was also a new face, Michael M. Thomas of Lehman Brothers. 

New drilling platforms included the ENDEAVOUR, HERON, and CHAPPARAL, plus a 60% share of a ship-shaped floating
vessel off the coast of Austrialia. Gulf Oil of Denmark had signed a $9 million contract for a new platform called the MAERSK
EXPLORER, the first of a new generation of LeTourneau drilling units. CHAPPARAL was under contract to AGIP, a
subsidiary of the Italian state oil compnay ENI, for operations in the Adriatic Sea. VINEGAROON was under contract to
Petrobras of Brazil. Zapata's offshore drilling activity by now comprehended areas off Denmark, Brazil, Italy, England, the
Persian Gulf, Australia, and Louisiana. 

Turning to the world drilling market, the new post-Bush management offered the following overview: "The offshore drilling
industry, in which Zapata is a significant participant, has undegone a substantial change in character and scope in the past five
years. Five years ago, almost all the offshore drilling units were operating in one geographical area, the Gulf of Mexico. Today,
six separate offshore provinces have emerged as showing solid evidence of having major hydrocarbon deposits." World
horizons were vast, with the Zapata mangement counting seventeen countries with offshore oil or gas production already
underway, and fifty other countries exploring or drilling for oil. Zapata's ability to operate in such places as the North Sea,
Austrialia, and Kuwait is indicative not just of a very close relationship between Zapata and the seven sisters oil cartel, but of an
excellent entree with the inner sanctum of that cartel, the Royal Dutch Shell-British Petroleun nexus, which exercised the
decisive influence on the policies and contingency planning of the cartel. Royal Dutch Shell was for example the company that
availed itself of the services of Lord Victor Rothschild for its future planning. 

The 1966 Zapata Annual report estimated that about 50% of the company's profits came from US operations, 20% from the
North Sea, 10% from the Middle East, 10% from Austrialia, and 10% from a subsidiary called Williams-McWilliams, which
carried on dredging operations in the Gulf of Mexico and the lower Mississippi River. One can imagine that George Bush had
to some degree participated in the negotiations for these operations. During his years with Zapata, it would thus appear that he
had been able to extend the scope of his activity from the Cuban-Caribbean arena to the Persian Gulf, other parts of the Arab
world, Brazil, Scandinavia, and the Adriatic waters between Italy and Yugoslavia. 

As the 1966 Congressional election approached, Bush was optimistic about his chances of finally getting elected. This time,
instead of swimming against the tide of the Goldwater cataclysm, Bush would be favored by the classic mid-term election
reflext which almost always helps the Congressional candidates of the party out of power. And LBJ in the White House was
vulnerable on a number of points, from the escalation of the Viet Nam war to stagflation. The designer gerrymandering of the
new Houston congressional district had functioned perfectly, and so had his demagogic shift towards the "vital center" of
moderate conservatism. Because the district was newly drawn, there would be no well-known incumbent to contend with. And
now, by one of the convenient coincidences that seem to be strewn through Bush's life , the only obstacle between him and
election was a troglodyte Democratc conservative of an ugly and vindictive type, the sort of figure who would make even Bush
look reasonable. 

The Democrat in question was Frank Briscoe, a former district attorney. According to the Texas Observer, "Frank Briscoe
was one of the most vicious prosecutors in Houston's history. He actually maintained a 'ten most wanted convictions list' by
which he kept the public advised of how much luck he had getting convictions against his chosen defendants then being held in
custody. Now, as a candidate for Congress, Briscoe is running red-eyed for the right-wing in Houston. He is anti-Democratic,;
anti-civil rights; anti-foreign aid; anti-war on poverty. The fact that he calls himself a Democrat is utterly irrelevant." By contrast,
from the point of view of the Texas Observer, "His opponent, George Bush, is a conservative man. He favors the war in
Vietnam; he was for Goldwater, although probably reluctantly; he is nobody's firebrand. Yet Bush is simply civilized in race
relations, and he is now openly rejecting the support of the John Birch Society. This is one case where electing a Republican to
Congress would help preserve the two-party balance of the country and at the same time spare Texas the embarrassment" of
having somebody like Briscoe go to Washington. [fn 5] Bush's ideological face-lifting was working. "I want conservatism to be
sensitive and dynamic, not scared and reactionary," Bush told the Wall Street Journal. 

Briscoe appears in retrospect as a candidate made to order for Bush's new moderate profile, and there are indications that is
just what he was. Sources in Houston recall that in 1966 there was another Democratic candidate for the new Congressional
seat, a moderate and attractive Democrat named Wildenthal. These sources say that Bush's backers provided large-scale
financial support for Briscoe in the Democratic primary campaign, with the result that Wildenthal lost out to Briscoe, setting up
the race that Bush found to his advantage. A designer district was not enough for George; he also required a designer opponent
if he was to prevail-- a fact which may be relevant to the final evaulation of what happened in 1988. 

One of the key points of differentiation between Bush and Briscoe was on race. The district had about 15% black population,
but making some inroads here among registered Democrats would be of decisive importance for the GOP side. Bush made
sure that he was seen sponsoring a black baseball team, and talked a lot about his work for the United Negro College Fund
when he had been at Yale. He told the press that "black power" agitators were not a problem among the more responsible
blacks in Houston "I think the day is past," Bush noted, "when we can afford to have a lily white district. I will not attempt to
appeal to the white backlash. I am in step with the 1960's." Bush even took up a position in the Office of Economic
Opportunity anti-povety apparatus in the city. He supported Project Head Start. By contrast, Briscoe "accused" Bush of
courting black support, and reminded Bush that other Texas Congressmen had been voting against civil rights legislation when it
came up in Congress. Briscoe had antagonized parts of the black community by his relentless pursuit of the death penalty in
cases involving black capital defendants. According to the New York Times, "Negro leaders have mounted a quiet campaign
to get Negroes to vote for [Bush]." 

Briscoe's campaign ads stressed that he was a right-winger and a Texan, and accused Bush of being "the darling of the Lindsey
[sic]- Javits crowd," endorsed by labor unions, liberal professors, liberal Republicans and liberal syndicated columnists. Briscoe
was proud of his endorsements from Gov. John Connally and the Conservative Action Committee, a local right-wing group.
One endorsement for Bush that caused Briuscoe some difficulty was that of Bush mentor Richard M. Nixon. By 1966, Nixon
was on the comeback trail, having wihstood the virtual nervous breakdown he had undergone after losing his bid for the
governorship of California in 1962. Nixon was now in the course of assembling the delegates that would give him the GOP
presidential nomination in Miami in 1968. Nixon came to Houston and made campaign appearances for Bush, as he had in
1964. 

Bush had brought in a new group of handlers and image-mongers for this 1966 race. His campaign manager was Jim Allison
from Midland. Harry Treleaven was brought in design Bush's propaganda. 

Treleaven had been working at the J. Walter Thompson Advertising Agency in New York City, but he took a leave of absence
from J. Walter to come to work for Bush in Texas. At J. Walter Thompson, Treleaven had sold the products of Pan American,
RCA, Ford, and Lark cigarettes. He was attracted to Bush because he had plenty of money and was willing to spend it
liberally. After the campaign was over, Treleaven wrote a long memo about what he had done. He called it "Upset: The Story
of a Modern Political Campaign." One of the basic points in Treleaven's selling of Bush was that issues would play no role.
"Most national issues today are so complicated, so difficult to understand, and have opinions on that they either intimidate or,
more often, bore the average voter...Few politicians recognize this fact." In his memo, Treleaven describes how he walked
around Houston in the hot August of 1966 and asked people what they thought of George Bush. He found that many
considered Bush to be "an extremely likeable person," but that "there was a haziness about exactly where he stood politically." 

For Treleaven, this was an ideal situation. "There'll be few opportunities for logical persuasion, which is all right-- because
probably more people vote for irrational, emotional reasons than professional politicians suspect." Treleaven's approach was
that "politicians are celebrities." Treleaven put 85% of Bush's hefty campaign budget into advertising, and 59% of that was for
television. Newspaper ad got 3%. Treleaven knew that Bush was behind in the polls. "We can turn this into an advantage," he
wrote, "by creating a 'fighting underdog ' image. Bush must convince voters that he really wants to be elected and is working
hard to earn their vote. People sympathize with a man who tries hard: they are also flattered that anyone would really exert
himself to get their vote. Bush, therefore, must be shown as a man who's working his heart out to win." 

As Joe McGinnis summed up the television ads that resulted: "Over and over, on every television set in Houston, George Bush
was seen with his coat slung over a shoulder; his sleeves rolled up; walking the streets of his district; grinning, gripping,
sweating, letting the voter know he cared. About what, was never made clear." [fn 7] 

Coached by these professional spin doctors, Bush was acting as mainstream, fair, and conciliatory as could be. In an exchange
with Briscoe in the Houston Chronicle a few days before the election, he came out for "a man's right to join a union and his right
to strike, but I additionally would favor fair legislation to see that no strike can cripple this nation and endanger the general
welfare." But he was still for the Texas right to work law. Bush supported LBJ's "present Vietnam position.. I would like to see
an All -Asian Conference convened to attempt to settle this horrible war. 
G