Last month, NBC News decided to (finally) run part of the Lisa Myers 20/20 interview with Juanita Broaddrick. Therein, Bill Clinton was accused of rape by a very, very credible victim.

That should be big news, and it was in a few newspapers around the country. Not on television, though. The heavy hair-sprayed news-reader set embargoed the story. CNN mentioned it once, CBS and ABC not at all.

The fact is, it was groups like Free Republic that protested enough to shame NBC News into running part of that interview. Without their great efforts, NBC News would have completely buried the story as a favor to their impeached predator president and their other friends in the party of the ass.

Actually, NBC Nightly News embargoed the story, too. It ran on 20/20, but Nightly News has yet to cover it. They will not, ether. NBC News management buried the tape.

Contrast that with the Monica Lewinsky interview last week. All news outlets pumped up that show. The Lewinsky show was portrayed as one of the major TV events of the year. Then, America met Monica.

First, the camera work was terrible, which didn't help anything. But, it was Lewinsky who was the real surprise. No one really knew what to expect, but we did expect that someone resembling an adult would show up for the interview.

To say the Monica Lewinsky came off like a self-centered, egotistical little tramp would really be an understatement. Actually, she's a vacant dress. There's no one home. She appeared as a misguided 14 year old waif in a chubby 24 year old body. Her personal social and psychological characteristics were incomplete, not developed, never evident.

Interestingly enough, Lewinsky is a case study in point: A village cannot raise a child -- especially when that village is Hollywood. It takes adult parenting to raise a child and, judging by the results, Lewinsky had none.

That interview states volumes about the Clintons. Because, if that's all it takes to snare Bill, I truly fear for this country these next two years.

And really, there's nothing more that need be said.

Way back when -- when we were a lot poorer but didn't know it because we were happy and life was good -- there was a famous neighborhood orator who was also a United States Senator.

As a young boy always available to do odd jobs around the neighborhood, I was required to attend a rather large outside function one beautiful June day. The Senator spoke of the joy of being an American, love of country, duty to God and country, and how proud he was of all of us for joining various civilian national defense related programs that were still around after the Second World War.

Then, a surprising thing happened: His booming voice cracked and tears came to his eyes as he started to read the names of local boys killed in the Korean Police Action. He, too, knew some of those guys.

And then, just when we thought he was done, he started on Liberty.

Freedom and Liberty were a big deal with us back then. There were a lot of people in the neighborhood who had lived under Hitler and most of us lost relatives over there. So, when that serious stuff started, we kids knew that was not the time to be rustling around -- lest the nearest adult give us a healthy smack across the head.

That day, it was a repeat of his famous "box" speech I had heard before and we had also discussed thoroughly in school.

Of course he talked of the "ballot" box. I'm not sure, but it may have been an election year -- not that it ever mattered in his case. He was "Our Senator," everyone liked him, and that was that.

Then he said, "I have the soap box," and went on to explain to us how important it was that we also use our freedom of speech to get our political points across. The old folks loved that. Especially the ones who recently arrived from Europe.

But, when he got to the "jury" box he diverted from the law a little, some said. Apparently, he too agreed that a jury must not only judge the guilt of the person being tried, but also the applicability of the law in the matter before the jury. "That helps keep government in check," he said to thunderous applause.

Soon thereafter, a little joking around started and the band was playing, so I bugged out to the refreshment stand for a large cherry Coke. Even then, though, I knew he missed something. The speech was not complete. All of the "Boxes of Liberty" were not properly related.

The audience was greatly interested by the time I got back. That old guy didn't forget at all. The joking and the band playing were cover, marking time, while people he wanted came up to the bandstand.

The last Liberty Box, as we all knew very well back then, was the cartridge box. And so, after another five or ten minutes on the methods of protecting Liberty, the Senator made many mothers in the audience proud by personally giving awards for expertise and proficiency in the use of personal firearms.

Boy Scouts, student ROTC members from high schools and colleges, police officers . . . he lined them up and pronounced every name correctly (difficult, in that neighborhood) as he personally handed each of them an award. By their presence on that platform, each was proclaimed to be a good, honorable and useful member of society. They were "the protectors of Liberty." So said our Senator. Therefore, it must be true. That is how it was back then, when things were simpler and life was good. People said they could hear that final standing ovation two miles down the road that afternoon.

Because, there was another important thing we all knew for certain, deep in our own hearts: No Nazi Gestapo bastards or Stalinist commie pinko punks would be taking over OUR neighborhood anytime soon. We had our own damn army! And anyway, even us kids had guns and knew how to use them. Me too, I felt with pride.

A Polish Catholic Priest and a Polish Jewish Rabbi were to finish out the afternoon with some words and a prayer or two. Both were very memorable with their freedom and Liberty oriented mini-sermons and their semi- nondenominational prayers. Again, there were tears evident in many of the older folks; those who lost family and friends to the Nazi jackbooted Gestapo bastards just about a decade earlier. The younger among us always thought it unfortunate that the war stories kept getting rehashed. But, unless the older folks said something, it was not our place to mention it.

Then, as the flags came down, a very tall police officer sat at attention atop his beautiful thoroughbred horse and blew a very chilling rendition of Taps and the Boy Scouts fired off a twenty-one gun salute in honor of those boys the Senator mentioned who were recently lost in Korea.

Back then, we all knew that the soap box, the ballot box and the jury box were the basics of freedom and liberty and must be appreciated and used properly. They defend liberty in a free society. It's when a society becomes less than free -- when government gets crazy and the other boxes no longer work properly -- that we must reach for that cartridge box.

As those two great religious leaders painted so dramatically in word pictures that fine June afternoon many years ago, one only needs to read the story of the Warsaw Ghetto for an indication of just how quickly and easily the necessity for the cartridge box can occur.

There was one thing everyone readily agreed on back then. Liberty requires work. These "Liberty Boxes" are not just rights, they are also our civic duties.

There are certain points on which most Americans will readily agree when the subject is the federal government.

First is that there are two sets of laws, one for federal bureaucrats and another for citizens. Bureaucrats do not need to follow our "rule of law." There is no punishment for federal officials who violate the rights of citizens. Nor is there any requirement, other than an oath of honor, that they obey the Constitution.

Second, federal officials tend to lie a lot. It seems to be nearly impossible for any of them to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. They get away with lying to the people by calling what they say "spin."

Third, there are way too many federal laws, rules and regulations. Worse yet, different departments will interpret these laws, rules and regulations in different ways. So will different courts. Still worse, no one in Washington seems to think we have enough laws, rules and regulations yet. They keep making more.

Fourth, our federal courts are a mess. The courts have become little more than a profit center run by lawyers for lawyers. Normal citizens cannot afford to use the court system anymore, and the system is way too slow, anyway. Most judges will not enforce the Constitution -- or even the opinions of the Supreme Court -- when government is involved. The standards brought about by duty, honor and the rule of law are nearly nonexistent in today's legal system. And forget honesty. Law and truth have long ago taken different forks in the road.

Nowadays, everything in our lives is regulated by the federal government. They can't stay out of anything. Yet, when one asks a Member of Congress where they get the authority to legislate on a topic, they seldom give a clear answer. That's simply because those on Capitol Hill do not know where they get the authority. They don't worry about Constitutional constraints. They don't have to.

If a citizen points out that only certain powers are allowed the federal government by the Constitution, they'll get a blank stare until their Lord or Lady of the Hill remembers the Commerce Clause. The proper retort to that is to ask why the Founding Fathers went to all the trouble listing all those other authorities then, if everything and anything falls under Commerce. That'll end that discussion instantly. They don't know, or care.

Today's American citizen does not trust the federal government. Mostly, all people want is to stay as far away from government as possible -- and try not to do anything to get noticed. But, each year -- with each new batch of oppressive laws, rules and regulations -- that becomes much more difficult.

So, what is a citizen's recourse once they get caught in the sights of an out of control federal agent? What can an innocent person do if government decides to charge them with some unknown and esoteric federal law, rule or regulation no one but a handful of federal agents understands? How may a citizen fight the blatant violations of privacy, liberty and property by government agencies?

Today, unless a person has about $100,000 available to pay attorneys, there is nothing they can do if government starts violating their rights or stealing their assets. Therefore, federal agents freely take cars, homes, businesses and farms from people because they "may have" committed a crime of some sort sometime. They'll also take any free cash they can find, making it impossible to hire an attorney to fight back. No charges are necessary anymore. That fascist fix is the law of the land.

Such a scenario was presented to a small group of elderly, well-heeled, country gentlemen a few days ago. The resultant discussion proved to be quite lively. All agreed that they would not stand for it. In general, the opinion was to go through all proper legal channels first. Most interesting, however, was the fact that a style of well directed and selective violence was mentioned rather frequently.

This is an important discussion. Government has all the power nowadays because no one is defending our rights under the Constitution. We no longer know what the so called "rule of law" actually is because it keeps changing. And, with the new forfeiture laws, they can steal anything they want from anyone with little more than a semblance of a reason. No real charges need ever be made.

What, then, is our recourse? If they took all your money, your car and your home, how may you protest? There is no one in government to protect citizens falling into such foolishness. So, is one to just give up, roll over and play dead?

Somehow, in some way, there needs to be a mechanism to protect the rights of the people against government. This is important, because any of us could get caught up in that type of mess.

The Founding Fathers set up a federal government that was intended to protect the rights of the people. Two-hundred years later, the federal government has mutated into 90% of our problem.

Now, we again need a fix. Let the discussions begin.

Last Thursday, we received a cute message from FEMA. For the uninformed, the message sounded somewhat uninteresting but positive. FEMA was bragging to the public because it thought it did something correctly. We knew a little different because, for a report in Issue #120, we read the complete annual General Accounting Office (GAO) report on all federal agencies.

http://www.freedom.gov/results/gao/risks

Anyway, FEMA announced to the American Public:

"Washington March 4, 1999 - James L. Witt, the director of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, announced today that the agency's accounting of its 1998 financial activities -- the first fully comprehensive financial statement produced by the agency -- received an unqualified audit opinion. The rating, issued by FEMA's independent Office of the Inspector General, is the highest rating given for financial statements. This is the fifth year in a row that FEMA has received the highest possible audit rating."

Yeah but that's the fox guarding the hen house. FEMA inspected FEMA. As we remembered, that's not even close to what the GAO report said, so we went back for a second look just to make sure. This time, an itemized account at

http://www.freedom.gov/results/ig99/fema.asp

was also available. Among other things, GAO reports:

FEMA is having trouble implementing the Results Act: "FEMA still does not have systems in place to capture performance data for many of its 5-year operational objectives and annual performance goals, and baseline performance data are still not yet available."

Financial management needs improvement: "Enhancements are still needed to FEMA's financial management, accounting, controls, and reporting systems to fully support management decision-making and achieve the objectives of the Chief Financial Officers Act."

FEMA's management of grant funds is inefficient: "FEMA continues to lack adequate assurance that grantees use grant funds effectively, efficiently, and economically."

Weak information management systems effect FEMA's ability to manage its programs: "Implementing and maintaining information management systems that enhance FEMA's ability to manage its programs and operations -- given limited resources -- are ongoing challenges."

Anyway, according to the GAO report, FEMA did not even bother to prepare financial statements for the whole agency. Apparently, FEMA is into many things it does not want us pesky citizens to know about. And, were it to obey the law correctly, the report would go to Congress. Thereafter, Majority Leader Dick Armey would post some of the information on the Internet. That way, pesky people like us would be examining their budget -- with the proverbial fine tooth comb.

So, the agency does not bother to follow the law. Financial statements were not prepared for the whole agency. Therefore, they are about to get a talking to from people at GAO and Congress. Meanwhile, for anyone who is interested, a few billion of FEMA's budget is buried in the Defense budget.

** We gave tens of billions of dollars to Russia these past few years. And, for what? Today, their unemployment rate is about 50% and only about a quarter of those working get a paycheck more than every once in a while. So, what did Russia do with the money? Pilfered it to make war technology to sell to China.

With all of today's great technology, the United States still can't defend us against enemy missiles. And, the Clinton, Clinton and Gore group plan to keep it that way. The Soviet Union, you see, is against it. So is China. And those who think the Soviet Union does not exist anymore better take a damn hard look at the group coming to power in Russia. The same old communists are back, but this time they are teaming up with China, against us.

** Many critics complain that agencies bringing relief supplies and setting up refugee camps in Bosnia and Herzegovina are actually aiding and abetting ethnic cleansing in the area. Relief workers help targeted villagers escape before being attacked, which acts to remove them from their homes -- and the area. Our whole program over there seems schizophrenic, to say the least. Historically, the only thing that ever made those factions stop fighting was a strong dictator. Is that what we are to become? If not, it's time to back out and let Europeans handle it.

** According to Investor's Business Daily, the very oppressive and unconstitutional "Know Your Customer" bank regulators received 70,000 [140,000 according to Rep. Ron Paul] overwhelmingly negative comments from the public and financial institutions. Lest anyone forget, a group called the Financial Action Task Force on Money Laundering (FATF) was established by the G-7 Summit in Paris in 1989 to examine measures to combat money laundering. (http://www.oecd.org/fatf/reports.htm) It is the foreign bureaucrats at FATF who demanded that bank snitch program here. Now, some of the regulators say they may cancel the program. Still, the fact remains that American bureaucrats are either unwilling to honor our Constitution, or perhaps fear retribution from their international leaders. In any case, they were proposing un-American activities and must be fired.

** Just as we thought: Clinton's welfare to work program got more than 10,000 hard core welfare recipients off the rolls and into federal agencies. The White House even hired a couple. Undereducated bureaucrats. It will be interesting to see how they take charge over the American public.

** Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott said, now that President Clinton's impeachment trial is over, a flurry of legislative activity is coming. House Members also promise fast work on "the people's business." Don't any of these bozos understand that this is exactly what the American people fear? We need less law, not more. Tell them so. Often.

** Meanwhile, Clinton called for a $1.2 billion increase in federal education spending -- to $34.7 billion next year ($302 per taxpayer). The federal government provides only about 6.2% of all K-12 public education funds. The states' share of education spending is 43.9 percent, or $162.4 billion. And local school districts provide 39.8 percent of school funds, or $147.5 billion. Yet, the federal government passes most of the stupid laws, rules and regulations. This is silly; little more than a make- work program for federal bureaucrats and administrators.

** The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms recently released another lame-brain report asserting that most guns used in crimes are purchased, not stolen. The problem is, that assertion is based on very indirect evidence, not gun traces. John R. Lott Jr., at the University of Chicago School of Law, gets it right in Wall Street Journal last week: Americans own about 240 million guns, and some 450,000 gun crimes were committed in 1996. In the unlikely event that the average criminal uses the same gun just twice, only 0.09 percent of all guns are used for criminal purposes in any given year.

Clinton asserts that gun shows serve as a source of guns to criminals but that statement misleads people into believing licensed firearms dealers sell guns at the shows without conducting background checks. Everyone needed a permit to purchase a handgun in the hundred or so gun shows I have attended. Even me.

Anyway, most experts have found that citizens use guns to prevent crimes about five times more frequently than crimes are committed with guns. In all instances, the reductions in gun ownership by law-abiding citizens in a community leads to more crime. I personally know of a few honorable citizens who prevented harm to self or others via the proper (and legal) application of a personal firearm.

** Twenty years ago, half as many people were arrested for drug crimes, and the nation's incarceration rate was closer to that of other democracies. Then came the flood of crack cocaine via quasi-government agents -- and its close association with violent crime. The U.S. toughened its drug laws, paying specific attention to crack. In the last decade, the number of people imprisoned for drugs has shot up more than 400 percent -- about twice the growth rate for violent crime. So, instead of stopping the influx of illegal aliens and cocaine by the ton from Mexico, Clinton was down there last week buddying up with the narco-government.

Simply put, it would be impossible to consistently smuggle tons of anything across the U.S.--Mexican border without the approval of high level agents on both sides. The illegal drug cartels have saturated our cities with cocaine, now they are gearing up for heroin. While thousands of acres of poppies grow in Mexico, Clinton publicly approves their government as partners in the drug fight.

Something is terribly wrong with these pictures, folks.

  ** uhuh **

The President said he is reducing taxes.

uhuh.

Congress says they are balancing the budget.

uhuh. Sez who?

Web Home Page: www.uhuh.com

---

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 1996 by Forest Glen Durland.

hu125.htm. Revised 8-10-99. uhuh and GR Force are non-profit.