Because the Clintons still have all the media scandal time locked up, President George W. Bush is traveling a clear road at nearly full speed. It’s nice, after eight long years, to turn on a news show and know that when disparaging remarks are made about "the president" they are not about "This President."

We must remember, too, that Bill and Hillary promised us a "twofer." That’s what we got, too. She did Waco, the war rooms and the health care fiasco. He did Monica, and whatever other woman came within reach -- both with and without cooperation. Both lied, cheated and obstructed justice. Along the way, both proposed obnoxious restrictions on our freedom and sent forth minions to interfere in the workings of foreign governments.

The truest question/statement of the week comes from the left. Writer Christopher Hitchens asks the very loaded question: "Are the Clintons better off now than they were eight years ago?"

Well, let’s see here . . . they came to Washington with just a few thousand dollars in assets and owing the IRS more than what they were worth. But, that IRS thing went away as soon as Hillary placed one of her friends in charge.

Hillary didn’t work at all these past eight years but Bill made $200,000 a year before taxes.

Eight years later, they have two fancy homes worth about $6-million and a couple million in the bank. They also have a legal defense fund holding a couple million for them and a library/slush-fund with (some say) over $200-million in assets. And, of course, they are both still out begging money for those funds.

Oh, and Hillary just got an $8-million advance on a book deal. Bill is also expected to receive a few million from his book deal. Neither of these deals are expected show a profit for the publisher. So, what are they?

That library/slush-fund hit the jackpot for Bill. He’ll need about a tenth of it for the library. The rest is for his "expenses." As we said, they are still collecting money in million dollar increments on that and it is expected to get up to three or four hundred million bucks before the contributions trickle down.

Which brings us to our own question: Why?

We understand how the first $200-million got in there. He was still president and had things to offer for the money. Why would anyone contribute now, though? What’s in it for them?

Hillary is but one of one-hundred in the Senate. Word has it she’s not very well liked, either. There is little she can do to help anyone -- not in million dollar increments worth, anyway.

So, perhaps some of the moneyed folks are just hedging their bets. After all, there is a chance she may run for president. There is also a (better) chance he will shoot for Secretary General of the United Nations. Either way, they could do quite a lot to help the finances of the moneyed elite. And, if both were to win, the world would belong to the moneyed elite because the "Third Way" has very conscripting plans for the average proletariat.

Therefore, the brouhaha over Clinton’s pardon of billionaire fugitive Marc Rich actually is an important topic. Some on the left would have us "just move on" and forget about the Clintons. But, that’s as difficult as "forgetting" about an infected, quarter-sized boil on your butt -- it’s possible, but not real likely for very long. Besides, those on the left have a vested interest in keeping the Clintons in power. It’s a control thing.

Three things are very important then: All Clinton investigations must continue, with our encouragement. We must demand a complete accounting of the Clinton slush funds -- the library and both legal defense funds. And, we must encourage everyone to shun the Clintons and anyone involved with them.

That’s about the only protection we have left.

Some have a prurient interest in why Denise Rich visited Bill Clinton a hundred or so times while Hillary was out of town. Come on now, we’re all adults here. This is Bill Clinton, already! She had two things he wanted: Her money and her.

What we must learn is how many millions she gave him to have her ex-husband pardoned and exactly where that money came from. Then, we need to know what the Clinton’s Swiss bank accounts look like.

Simultaneous with that, we need an investigation on exactly why Clinton pardoned all those drug dealers and what he received for thirty-some other dubious pardons. What money was exchanged there?

We also shouldn’t forget that there are still a couple very important money laundering investigations open -- involving both Clinton and Gore. For instance, much of the Chinese money laundering matter is still open. Ditto for the union money laundering caper. There’s still a year on the clock for those matters.

Except, for this round, Reno and Holder are gone. Ashcroft is attorney General. Therefore, we look for a slow walk towards a long series of indictments.

If this is to be a country of laws, let’s have them applied -- starting at the top. We must not allow the "just move on" mentality to prevail. The perpetrators must be apprehended and brought to trial.

To be sure, they’re fun to watch. The problem is, even some of their most preposterous disinformation campaigns are often discussed seriously by conservatives. And so it is now, with the new propaganda bubbling up ever so slowly from the bowels of the left.

They float six or eight of these scams a year, hoping that at least a couple catch on. Most of them, like the one about Hillary working hard in the background to help children, are just so obviously silly that they don’t last more then a few days. Others, like the scam that the limousine liberals of the far left are actually working for the benefit of the workers, rather than their rich elite friends in the penthouses, caught on and became a perennial lie.

Unknown to most Americans is the fact that the radical left sink megabucks in undocumented soft money into these trial balloons. Quite often, major advertising and public relations firms are hired to "get the word out." Generally speaking, getting the radical left message to leak out as fact is rather easy, too. After all, there are dozens of far-left sympathizers in the national media who make a career spouting the Party line talking points.

So it’s with great interest that we see a quiet campaign beginning to convince the American people that the national media is actually too conservative. Some of the most rabid left media organizations are already padding "polls" to prove their point. Talking heads are alluding to the "problem" from time to time. And some national newspapers famous for their pro-socialist attitude are even going along with the program by writing, in a convoluted sort of way, about conservative issues. Some writers are so expert at the propaganda they actually can start out with a conservative premise and weave the reader down a far left path. And they are.

The plan, of course, is to lull moderate and conservative readers into the belief that "journalism" now represents their viewpoint. Journalism, as an industry, currently has less credibility than the old time used car salesman. They need to rebuild trust, kindle interest in what they report, and make people believe the reported words are true.

So, as a beginning, these "journalists" caused a collective dump on the nation’s first scumbag. It’s not that he doesn’t deserve it, of course. But it was interesting how they started the moment he was out of the White House and, presumably, no longer useful to them.

Of course, there is a plan to this propaganda. First, the Clinton’s didn’t do anything more preposterous, illegal or immoral these past six weeks than they did the previous eight years. So, why turn up the volume now? Could this just be to garner credibility for journalism?

The answer is both yes and no.

Yes, the journalism industry know they have greatly lost credibility in the eyes of most Americans. How much they actually care is unknown at this time. However, it is obvious that they know they need to do some repair on that.

But no, that is not the only reason many perceive a centrist shift within the liberal news industry. They are, after all, still owned and operated by limousine liberals. Most of the major talking heads and columnists are still the same old socialists. And the same liberals at the wire services still feed "news" to both the electronic and print media. Little changed. All that changed is that the few dozen influential journalists receiving their marching orders from the powers that be on the far left were instructed to give President Bush a break for about six months and instead to dump on Bill Clinton for three months, or so.

The simple reason for that is, as we said above, they want the American people to start seeing the media as centrist, or even somewhat conservative. And, when Bill Clinton starts his next campaign -- next year -- all his warts, ethical problems and illegal activities will be "old news" and we will again be told to "move on" to the new subject at hand.

The media then, being "almost conservative," will have more credibility when they try to form public opinion in favor of Bill Clinton’s new campaign.

Sounds almost like a conspiracy, eh? It’s not, though. Not really. There are only a few corporations owning the media. They talk among themselves. It is to the benefit of their bottom line that they maintain their incestuous relationship with their limousine liberal friends in politics. And it is, after all, their media. They own it. So, they can report anything in it they wish.

They do, too. Remember the election night fiasco?

That’s freedom. Isn’t it?

So, Dubya gets a free ride, full speed ahead, for six months. The media starts looking like they almost care about justice, liberty and the American way and Clinton gets all his scandals out early so he has a nearly clean slate for his Secretary General campaign.

There’s no conspiracy. It’s a solid, workable plan.

Police are getting so high-tech lately that soon they’ll be able to watch us all from a distance. If Hillary had it her way, we would all have our national identification cards today. Then, all the police would need to do with suspected lawbreakers would be to cancel all accesses allowed by our cards -- bank accounts, medical treatment, driving, etc. -- until we presented our body to the nice officer for interrogation.

That was the ultimate Clinton plan for that smart card, after all. It’s just that quite a few Americans refused to participate. And, because the Clinton’s central point was socializing medicine, we had plenty of money from physicians with which to launch a lobbying campaign against the scheme.

But, that’s not to say that government agents are not watching us without benefit of a warrant. Traffic cameras are obvious to millions of Americans around the country. By now, most people have heard of the National Security Agency and their Echelon telephone and e-mail tapping network. Not to be left out, the FBI named its secret e-mail surveillance system "Carnivore." But, the system was discovered so they redesignated it simply DCS1000.

Unless the person to be investigated is first presented with a warrant signed by a judge and stating exactly what is to be searched, all this is very unconstitutional. But don’t bother telling anyone in Washington. The protections of the Constitution have long ago given way to the expediency of the police. The Fourth Amendment is little more then an inconvenience to government nowadays. Law enforcement has dozens of excuses as to how and why they can get around our rule of law -- the Constitution.

Anyway, now comes yet another little gizmo for the police officer on foot patrol and/or the plain-clothes detective working discreetly in the field. This is something everyone reading this will understand perfectly: A computer.

Ah yes, a little hand held computer connected to a network. Not necessarily the Internet, though. This little bugger will be connected to the local, state and federal police computer networks. But heck, let’s let them tell you some of the story:

"Drawing on their collective 100 years of experience in the public safety sector, Public Safety Group, Inc., based in Orlando Florida, has released a new product designed for law enforcement users. PocketCop(1) is an application designed by PSG to bring handheld wireless computer technology to officers assigned to specialized assignments."

You betcha! An officer with a web cam hooked to it could sit in certain popular restaurants we know and scan everyone’s face from a distance so as to pick out the ones most wanted for nose candy offenses. It would take a minute each to scan them and get the information back that way, but they would have time.

"In addition, PocketCop also offers e-mailing and messaging capabilities -- a vast improvement over voice transmissions which can be monitored by anyone with a police scanner."

Well, most police already have cell phones, but never mind. I’m just being inconvenient here.

"The PocketCop© uses hand-held wireless PDA to allow officers instant access to state and federal databases as well as secure e-mailing and messaging. Authorized users can access vehicle license registration, drivers license information, stolen vehicle information, wants/warrants information and miscellaneous information such as articles, boats, guns, etc. from virtually any location served by the coverage area of the wireless network. Electronic messaging and peer-to-peer communication is also available. Various encryption methods are implemented and required to provide secured transactions between the handheld device and the local agency’s server.

"With PocketCop, officers use a stylus and a hand-held wireless device with a 2 x 3 inch screen to query state and federal databases. License plate numbers can be searched easily and quickly to determine owner information and if a car is stolen or the owner is wanted. Drivers’ licenses inquiries return protective order, concealed handgun and national, regional and state wanted information."

All of that stuff is already available on the patrol car computer, of course. Still, my idea with the web cam notwithstanding, there does seem to be a few very useful applications for this device in police work. My first choice, however, would be a palm-top unit with a color display and a keyboard. Else, there would not be very many clearly worded "messages" going back and forth between officers in the field (trying to be quiet and inconspicuous). And, that lack of clarity is often exactly what gets people hurt.

-----------------------------

1. http://www.psginc.cc

A stopped clock is right twice a day. Some Democrats are right sometimes. And, even those "Third Way" socialists over at the Democratic Leadership Council (DLC) latch onto parts of a good idea once in a while.

Correctly noting that nearly three-quarters of American workers pay more in Social Security taxes than federal income taxes, the DLC recently outlined a plan for a payroll tax cut. "Since work is taxed at a flat rate, and earnings above $80,400 are exempted entirely from the Social Security portion of the payroll tax, this tax imposes an onerous burden on low-to-middle income families."

That’s true. Low to middle income families should pay zero to very little income tax. And, were it not for the sticky fingers of the Democrats in Congress, they would be paying a lot less in Social Security taxes, too.

In 1954, the Social Security payroll tax was 2 percent for the employer and 2 percent for the employee; maximum taxable earnings were $3,600 for a maximum tax of $144 per worker. By 1994, the Social Security tax for employer and employee combined totaled 12.4 percent on maximum taxable earnings of $60,000; the maximum tax was $7,514.40.

One would think that there would be quite a few hundred-billion bucks in the Social Security pot somewhere, but one would be wrong. The Democratic Party controlled Congresses swiped all the money to use for "programs" to buy votes. Instead of keeping a separate fund, they added the money to the general budget and spent it.

That is correct. The Democrats stole all of the Social Security money -- a couple trillion dollars. Every penny of it! All that is in the Social Security account today are worthless IOU’s and no collateral.

A decade or so ago, the Democrats started ranting about "saving" Social Security, never admitting that it was due to their lousy management and sticky fingers that the fund was broke. Well, the Democratic Party "fix" was to raise the payroll tax on working folks. Rich folks got a break because there was no payroll tax on most of their income. So, effectively, the lowest wage-earner was stuck paying the proportionately highest amount. Government workers, of course, paid zero payroll tax, so they didn’t care how high the rate was that normal American workers got stuck with.

When the Republicans took over Congress, they inherited the mess. Effectively, they zeroed out that Social Security account and looked for methods for secure financing of Social Security.

In truth, it could be very easy to both "fix" Social Security and get a noticeable tax break for the working poor.

First, Congress should put most of the money back in the fund. They say they have a surplus, so pay off those IOU’s. Then, invest all incoming Social Security money in standard government bonds -- the ones available to everyone on the open market.

That will keep the money away from Congress so they can’t spend it. However, the whole of the system needs repair, so more is still necessary.

Therefore, Social Security and Medicare should be the standard retirement package for all members of Congress and federal employees. After all, there is no reason in the world that any public servant should use taxpayer money to fund a better retirement and medical treatment package than the elderly in our society have. Furthermore, all government workers should pay the payroll tax and the cut-off should be raised to whatever the average member of Congress makes annually.

Then, it would be both simple and wise to give low wage earners a break on their payroll tax. After all, that money gets back into the economy almost immediately. It’s also a lot better than that "earned income tax credit," the Democratic Party invented thing that is little more than welfare.

Oh, and at the same time, government could stop sending Social Security checks to multimillionaires. Really now, they don’t need an extra $1,300 a month. Many elderly receiving checks have a much higher monthly country club and/or bar bill than that. I personally know two wealthy people who are totally embarrassed because they can’t stop the Social Security checks from coming.

If Congress and all federal workers were relegated to the same system as grandma down the street, the whole of the Social Security and Medicare package would soon get rather efficient and the account would be overflowing with cash. That would benefit all equally.

This all sounds like a little socialism, and it is. We would most certainly prefer the whole program put on the open market with many choices -- like medical savings accounts -- offered. However, we are stuck with this system for at least another decade or two so all we can do is repair it to be as secure and equitable as possible. And, because it was intended to help our indigent and near indigent in society, it seems like a good idea to favor that side of the equation first.

That still leaves the door wide open for a good sized across the board income tax cut. We all deserve that.

-----------------------------

For more information on tax cuts, visit:

http://www.ncpa.org/oped/bartlett/bartlett01.html

This web page can NOT be altered or sold, but may be copied intact for reasonable distribution in keeping with the philosophy of uhuh and GR Force, who can assume no liabilities. Please make you own decisions.

The term U-Mail, uhuh and this web page are Copyright 2001 by Forest Glen Durland, subject to Fiedor's rights.

fron218.htm. Revised 2-17-01. uhuh and GR Force are non-profit.