Heads Up
A Weekly edition of News from around our country
April 25, 1997 #32
by: Doug Fiedor fiedor19@eos.net
----------------------------------------------------------
Previous Editions at: http://mmc.cns.net/headsup.html
----------------------------------------------------------
TAX POLITICIANS
Readers of "Heads Up" know that we're no friend of
socialism. So, it was no surprise that we came out
against the Kennedy-Hatch kiddy care medical bill four
weeks ago. The program is little more than a disguised
Hillary light medical plan, a 100% big-government,
socialist redistribution of the wealth scheme.
But, since then, a few more Members of Congress
have signed on to that idiocy. A couple Republican
socialists are even planning to present the same bill in
the House.
So, we're going to reconsider. However, with a
slight twist.
The Kennedy-Hatch bill proposes to pay for uninsured
children's medical care through a tax increase on
cigarettes. They think that by increasing the tax on
cigarettes by 43-cents per pack, they could raise enough
money to purchase health insurance for every uninsured
kid in America.
That is just not true. Many people are already
cutting back on smoking. This tax would increase the
price of a pack of cigarettes by an average of about one-
third around the country. Which would, undoubtedly,
cause even more people to stop smoking.
Therefore, they would have to use money from the
general fund to pay for this new entitlement program.
Which means, they would also have to increase the national
debt to pay for the program -- and hence, pass the cost on
down the line for our great-grandkids to pay later.
There's a better way.
Each and every year, politicians raise Billions of
dollars in campaign funds. On top of that -- when you
consider all of the free trips and dinners -- they
collectively receive many hundreds of millions of dollars
in free goods and services annually. None of this is
taxed.
Politicians all travel first class, or better.
They're taken to eat at the best of restaurants and
treated to the finest seats at stage performances and
sporting events. They get free parking, free
transportation, free medical treatment, a large expense
account to play with, and first class treatment every
place they go.
Tax it all by one-third.
Isn't it about time the Lords and Ladies of the
Capitol start sharing the same burden they force on the
rest of us?
They are the ones making $140 to $180-thousand a
year, plus at least that much again in perks. They are
the group with more millionaires per capita than any other
group in the country. And, when you consider their
campaign funds, they are, in fact, an annual renewable
source of billions of dollars in untaxed money.
Remember that the next time they talk about
raising taxes on the working folk. These politicians are
an untapped source for hundreds of millions of tax
dollars annually.
And, here's another thought: If we also slap a
33% tax on all money spent by lobbyists to influence
law . . . heck, we might even be able to start paying on
the national debt here. . . .
GOOD BY AMBROSE -- AND THANKS
The White House characterized him as an "invasion."
They even singled him out for personal attack in their
infamous report on the media "food chain" assault against
the Clinton administration's wrongdoings.
"That's another British invasion we're glad is over,"
the White House told George magazine. "The guy was
nothing but a pain in the ass."
But, this was not an intended invasion. Nor was it
even a planned assault. Rather, it was Ambrose Evans-
Pritchard, master wordsmith and investigative reporter,
recounting the news from the United States for his
newspaper, The Sunday Telegraph of London.
Ambrose Evans-Pritchard stands out far above the
thousands of American national media personnel for two
very basic reasons. First, quite obviously he knows how
to follow a story and dig up the necessary background
information. And second -- and this is very important --
if he has any type of preconceived political bias, it
never showed in his writing. When Evans-Pritchard saw a
newsworthy story, he gathered the information, verified
the facts and wrote the report based on those facts.
One would think that all news reporters work that
way. But, for those reporting national news, one would
be wrong.
American news reporters knew of many of Bill
Clinton's paramours long before he was elected president.
Yet, the only report to come out during the campaign was
the Jennifer Flowers story. Reporters also knew quite a
lot about the Whitewater story before the election. The
drug running at Mena Airport was known by many. So too
was the money laundering originating from Arkansas while
Clinton was governor. Yet, the national media chose to
boycott all of these stories. Why?
The answer is easy. The American media is
collectively quite liberal. Therefore, by and large, the
American media wanted a liberal president. National news
and campaign reporters who did not want to go along with
the unstated program of showing the Clintons in the best
possible light often found themselves transferred, or
even fired.
Certainly, all reporters and all American newspapers
did not conform to this over-simplified scenario. In the
United States, that would be an impossible feat to pull
off. But CNN and the three major television networks
did. And so did the news wire services, National Public
Radio and most of the nation's largest newspapers.
Ambrose Evans-Pritchard, however, did not. He
noticed early on that there was much more to the
Whitewater story than was related in the American press.
While following the Whitewater trail, he learned of Mena
Airport and the drug smugglers, of the death of witnesses,
of abuse of power, and everywhere, of administrative
cover-ups.
To be sure, some in the major media ultimately began
writing of these incidents later. But even then, almost
always they would have to quote the investigative reports
of Ambrose Evans-Pritchard. Because, somehow, his column
in The Sunday Telegraph usually managed to break the story
first.
We cannot help but wonder what kind of government
we would have in the United States if even a handful of
American reporters could do their jobs half as well as
this "mad scribbler" (as the Washington Post called him)
visiting from London.
Unfortunately, last Sunday Ambrose Evans-Pritchard
announced that, after four years of reporting from the
United States, he was returning home.
We'll miss your reports, Mr. Evans-Pritchard. And
we wish you all the best on your next assignment.
Note: To subscribe (free) to the Electronic version
of The Telegraph, go to: http://www.telegraph.co.uk
The Telegraph also has an index of links to Ambrose
Evans-Pritchard's articles. That address is the whole of
the next paragraph:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk:80/et?ac=
000141754327403&rtmo=32fe87f5&atmo=
32fe87f5&pg=/et/97/2/9/wamb109.html
SOCIALISM IN KENTUCKY
The Kentucky Board of Insurance recently released
a report on health insurance that should be heeded by all
state governments in the country.
In 1994, then Governor Brereton Jones and the
Kentucky General Assembly adapted a series of measures
they said were designed to make medical insurance more
available and affordable for all.
The fact is, they scaled down Hillary's disgraced
socialist medical care plan for Kentucky -- and even hired
a couple of Hillary's original perpetrators to come to
Kentucky and run the scam. Well, as the nation guessed
when Hillary's scheme was examined, the plan is an utter
and complete failure!
"It has become clear, as evidenced in the information
presented in this report, that a strong health insurance
market cannot prevail in Kentucky under the current
conditions," the Board's report said.
Yeah. Most people in Kentucky can no longer
purchase health insurance anymore. Four dozen insurance
companies closed their doors and fled the state, and the
ones still in the state have dramatically raised their
prices.
Only about 180,000 people now have coverage under
the new rules. But, another 340,000 people will have
their policies expire within the next 15 months. And,
unless they can afford to pay huge rate increases, they
will have to do without.
Yup, socializing medical care fixed it for everyone,
all right! For individual coverage, there are now only
two health care options left in the state, neither of
which are affordable to the average family.
People are turning up the heat on Paul Patton,
Kentucky's current governor. However, Patton was
lieutenant governor during the Jones administration --
he's part of the problem -- and, for the moment, does not
wish to change the socialist medical care scheme.
He will though. Those 340,000 additional people will
see to it shortly -- right about the time some of them
begin receiving their new insurance bills.
Even the Democratic stronghold of Kentucky is
changing, folks. People are starting to notice that these
stupid, "feel good" socialist programs are a fallacy.
They do not work because they cannot work.
This time, the Social-Democrats of Kentucky put
their socialism out front, where everyone in the state can
see just how foolish the program is. And this time, the
people of Kentucky are noticing the affect on their
pocketbooks. They will take the appropriate action in
next year's election.
Meanwhile, unless you're rich, don't try to buy
health care insurance in Kentucky. Hillary's fingerprints
are all over this crime against freedom the liberals
perpetrated on the people.
TAXING THE SERFS
Sometimes, if you listen very closely, you will hear
exactly what the Lords and Ladies controlling our lives
from their Washington stronghold actually think of us
serfs out here in "fly-over" country.
A surprisingly candid statement of just how low the
administration holds the productive members of American
society was made by Lawrence Summers, the Deputy Treasury
Secretary, last Monday.
In a meeting with a small group of reporters, Summers
blurted out, "When it comes to [cutting] the estate tax,
there is no case other than selfishness."
Gee, now it's selfish to want to pass on to your
family all that you have worked a lifetime to accumulate!
See how the administration wants this tax thing to work?
First, they take half of everything you make while you
work. Then, when you die, they want another half (or
more) of everything you still might have.
Well folks, when the serfs and share-croppers paid
Master, they only had to give up half once. Master let
the surviving spouse and kids have anything that may
have been accumulated. Not anymore, though!
Newt jumped right in on this one, too. Newt said
that Mr. Summers "owes every American taxpayer an
explanation for his unfair and irrational accusation that
Republican efforts to cut taxes are motivated by
selfishness. Does he really believe it is 'selfish' for
parents to leave their children the farm that has been in
the family for decades? Only the staunchest defender of
the big government status quo could claim that a tax cut
of any size is a selfish action."
We agree with Newt. And it better get fixed fast.
Else we serfs are going to have some very serious words
with Master about exactly what is ours and what is his!
Chairman of the House Republican Conference, John
A. Boehner (R-OH) jumped right in on that one, too: "Mr.
Summers' comments capture perfectly the arrogance of the
liberal elite, who believe that government has some right
to redistribute the fruits of a life's work."
Yeah, that's why we call them socialists, John.
They've long passed "liberal." Come to think of it,
controlling the people through taxation is a Marxist
scheme, but we'll let that go for the moment.
Even the usually nonpartisan U.S. Chamber of
Commerce issued a strongly worded statement on the
Summers' remark: "We're extremely disappointed by
Summers' comment. The estate tax is a tax on
entrepreneurs and accumulated savings and investments.
It's a confiscatory tax," wrote Martin Regalia, the
group's chief economist.
Yeah, it's a confiscatory tax all right. It's also
another socialist redistribution of wealth scheme that
for some reason never seems to bother the families with
names like Rockefeller and Kennedy. Only the working
folks, the producers of the country, get hit with it.
As far as we're concerned, no public official got
right down to the nitty-gritty of the situation. For
instance, what would happen to someone in upper management
of a corporation were they to come out with a stupid
public statement so inflammatory that it embarrassed and
angered both the company and it's customers?
Yeah. The Board of Directors would be "accepting"
their resignation! So, why should these turkeys get away
with such things in government?
Throw the bum out!
Come on Congress! Do your job. Show us it's not
just business as usual. Send Deputy Treasury Secretary
Lawrence Summers packing.
STARR MAY STRIKE
The Little Rock, Ark. Whitewater grand jury was
supposed to end in May. However, with the permission of
the court, the rules say that one six month extension may
be allowed.
So, into Judge Susan Webber Wright's U.S. District
Court went Kenneth Starr asking for the full six month
extension. Starr told the court he needed the extension
because he had found "extensive evidence" of obstruction
of justice. The extension was granted.
This all makes good material for the television
news readers, but they leave out all the good parts --
that is, if they even know any of the good parts.
It is almost unprecedented for a prosecutor to go
"public" with his reason behind asking for a grand jury
extension. Everything the grand jury does is supposed to
be secret. Therefore, Ken Starr must really be feeling
his oats. Someone in government is in deep trouble.
"This grand jury has heard extensive evidence of
possible obstruction of the administration of justice,"
Starr wrote in the court papers.
He told the court that the grand jury was devoting
a lot of its time examining possible "concealment and
destruction of evidence and intimidation of witnesses."
And furthermore that, "There have been assertions
of privileges which have been or will be the subject of
additional grand jury litigation. There have been
efforts by some persons and entities to challenge grand
jury subpoenas. This has led to grand jury litigation
under seal, some of which is ongoing."
He lost us there, folks. Unless, that is, Starr
is talking about Slick Willie himself and/or Webster
Hubbell not cooperating.
Starr mentioned obstruction of justice. And, he
wanted the Little Rock grand jury extended. Darn if that
don't sound like he's getting awfully close to Hillary!
You see, co-president Hillary is the one controlling
the Department of Justice. She's also got her minions
controlling some of the regulatory agencies. From the
very beginning, her intent was to obstruct justice. Slick
Willie is dirty as hell, too. But, on the obstruction of
justice stuff, he's probably just along for the ride.
Then there's another little matter of perjury.
Anyone reading even the few transcripts of the Clinton's
testimony made public quickly realizes that they cannot
keep their lies straight. Often they have denied
something during questioning under oath and later
admitted to the fact, after the documents they had in
their possession all along were released.
And folks, the operative word there was "often."
Ok, OK, for you purists, maybe the operative word was
"lie." So, let's split the difference then: They "often
lie." And they did it under oath. A lot! Which is a
prisionable offense.
Oh, and another little corresponding piece of
news: By extending the life of the grand jury, the time
of Susan McDougal's imprisonment for contempt is also
extended. You see, she remains in jail until she
cooperates with the grand jury, or until the grand jury
expires, whichever is first.
Susan McDougal may soon have familiar company,
though. As we said on these pages a few weeks ago, look
for Webster Hubbell to be joining her. Same charges.
GUERRILLA BOONDOGGLE
Before this year, few of us ever heard of the Tupac
Amaru Revolutionary Movement down in Peru. And, starting
in about a month, few of us ever will again. But thanks
to CNN, they got their moment of fame -- CNN, and the
fact that Tupac Amaru managed to capture an embassy full
of diplomats during a state party, that is.
And a well exactitude plan of attack it was, too!
They broke in and corralled 700 hostages before anyone
had time to protest.
There was a slight problem, though. It's called lack
of a real plan.
First, they had too many hostages. So, they
released all but 72 early on. Still, as they learned
abruptly, 14 guerrillas cannot adequately watch 72
hostages. Maybe in a prison situation 14 can watch 72.
But certainly not in an embassy surrounded by an army
that wants you dead.
The guerrilla's demands included the release of
hundreds of their comrades held in Peruvian prisons. That
might be a laudable goal from their point of view; and it
makes for good press. But, in real life, it's extremely
unlikely that any government would ever go along with such
a demand.
What they got was a supposed offer of safe passage
to Cuba or the Dominican Republic. That offer did two
things for the government. It got the rebels talking with
government negotiators, and it bought the government some
much needed time.
At this point, the guerrilla group was like the
hunter who caught the lion by the tail. Now what?
They had an excellent plan to take over the embassy.
Their plan was well executed. They had a hold on the
lion. Now what?
Where was the rest of the plan? Oops!
Were these fools so delusionary as to think they
would be allowed to walk out safely and disappear back in
the jungle? Maybe. Because they obviously had no
alternative course of action planned.
Peruvian army swat teams stormed the embassy,
ending the four-month hostage stalemate in an impressive
eruption of smoke and gunfire. All but one of the 72
hostages were rescued. And, of course, all of the 14
Marxist guerrillas died in the assault.
So, what came of all this? Nothing. Not one
thing. It was stupid from beginning to end.
Because, other than capturing an embassy full of
diplomats, and presenting a few unrealistic demands, the
rebels had no plan. Other than making a few stupid
demands, the rebels had nothing to say. And, when they
saw that their ploy was not working, the rebels had no out.
The government, on the other hand, had many
options. One, which they took, was to stall long enough
to train a force to attack the guerrillas and liberate
the hostages.
For that, they sent police and army personnel over
here for training. Meanwhile, Americans went there with
all of our fancy spy technology. Governments, you see,
have a plan. They also have cooperation agreements for
these situations.
Besides the obvious "don't do that," there must be
a moral here someplace. Perhaps the moral is that anyone
pulling one of these stupid capers is going to get more
than they bargained for -- and never, ever what they
ask for.
Another moral is that if you are crazy enough to
play guerrilla warfare in today's world, don't make the
mistake of sticking around to be attacked.
-- End --