The liberal Washington press corps doesn't seem to want to give us much background on the political players in the current presidential campaigns, so this publication will have to identify those with the most interesting histories.

The first is a man who raised many millions of dollars in "soft money" for the House Democratic Congressional Committee. This was soft money that would be illegal to donate directly to a Congressional campaign, so this guy used a trick in the campaign finance laws to set himself up as both the receiver of the soft money and the donator to specific Democratic Congressional campaigns. He skirted the law in other words.

Most interesting was how he distributed the money. He actually carried around envelopes with one or two thousand dollars cash in each. If a Representative needed a little "incentive" to vote correctly on a bill before the House, he would pass them an envelope containing one or two thousand dollars. Or, if he wasn't sure exactly how the Representative would vote, he would wait until after the vote and then reward the Representative with an envelope for voting correctly.

Remember now, this was cash money. It was intended, so they say with a wink and a nod, to be used as campaign funds. But, you know. . . . .

This went on for years in the Democratic controlled House. It was the way things were done there. That is, until our friend got a little greedy and wanted some "personal" cash that he could take home. Then, he sort of got caught.

As the story goes, he made a little sweetheart loan deal with an S&L executive to buy junk bonds from Drexel Burnham Lambert. Actually, it was a $100,000 loan deal that allowed him to purchase junk bonds from a friendly but going broke savings and loan, and he failed to include that little loan in his financial disclosure. Nor did he include the minor fact that he used insider information for the purchase or that he was using his position in Congress to benefit that trade.

Furthermore, when the House Bank check kiting scandal broke, he was listed as one of the top check- bouncers with more than $300,000 in bad checks (interest free loans that never seemed to get paid back) outstanding.

Then there was the matter of defending John Mack after it was revealed that Mack brutally assaulted and almost killed a woman. Mack was an aide to Democratic Majority Leader Jim Wright.

Well, things finally caught up with this guy and he abruptly resigned his seat in the House -- just before the Ethics Committee sanctioned him and the FBI arrested him. Being a loyal Democrat helps, though, because the Clinton Justice Department finally dropped all charges. And, incidentally, Clinton used him to help raise money for the last presidential campaign. Influence peddling again.

This guy crafted shake-downs, influence peddling and buying votes into an art form. Or, as Leonard Larsen wrote back in 1994 in a Scripps Howard News Service commentary, he is a "high profile reminder of what's wrong with the Democratic Party." But that was his game as Democratic Whip of the House. His name is Tony Coelho, and he is presently campaign chairman for Al Gore.

Those old names from the Democratic controlled House of Representatives -- O'Neill, Minish, Wright, Coelho, Rostenkowski, St Germain, et al -- ran a legal version of the old protection racket in which they would trade billions of dollars in favors for millions of dollars in campaign funds. Of course, the Clinton & Gore campaign learned a few of those tricks, too. Their problem was that they also took millions from the communist Chinese in return for favors. Consequently, no one even looked at all of the other dirty money the Clinton campaign received. But, because people were starting to smell a rat in those campaign finance deals, Clinton called Tony Coelho there to advise him.

It's no real surprise that Al Gore picked Tony Coelho to honcho his presidential campaign. In the campaign finance arena, Gore is just as dirty as Clinton, so there's a good fit there. All this tells us is that there will be plenty of interesting funny business to watch shortly. Because, Gore is losing and will need big cash really soon.

[Note: Some of the above information, and a great deal more, can be found in a 1988 book about Tony Coelho by Brooks Jackson titled "Honest Graft."]

It seems to be business as usual in Washington. So much so, in fact, that there is much too much to report.

For instance, the Lords and Ladies of Capitol Hill wanted to divvy up that supposed budget surplus, so they gave everyone in government a pay raise. The pay increase would amount to $2,856 for the typical white- collar government bureaucrat in Washington, which brings the annual average bureaucrat's salary up to $62,365. Of course, they also gave themselves a $4,600 annual cost of living increase -- which means that all judges and department heads get the same amount. The president however, gets a whopping $200,000 a year raise -- free travel, free room and board and $400,000 to spend on incidentals annually.

Someone let Al Gore speak on CNN's "Larry King Live." Al stuck his foot in his mouth again, calling for a total ban on handguns. House Judiciary Committee Chairman Henry Hyde is not too far behind Gore. Hyde said that they were close to an agreement on yet more legislation to tighten gun control and safety laws. This time they want to bar minors from possessing "assault weapons," ban large scale ammunition clips and require background checks for gun show purchases -- all of which is unconstitutional.

Bill Clinton requested a billion bucks to acquire more than 100 new parks in 40 states and territories. No matter about that little Constitutional provision requiring all federal land to be used for mundane things like office buildings and military bases, the federal government wants to gobble up as much land as possible and let it just sit there.

Al Gore, with a devious assist by the Justice Department, called "Cyberstalking" the new challenge for law enforcement. It seems that the FBI is itching for an excuse to monitor our communications on the Internet, so they came up with a new supposed crime that would let them get their foot in the door. Then they pushed forward Al and had him say: "Cyberstalking is a very serious new problem confronting us in the information age. This [FBI] report demonstrates the need for stronger federal and state laws to combat the problem." Sure. Like kids belong on the Internet unsupervised. Uh huh.

"As more and more Americans are going on- line -- particularly our children -- it is critical that they are protected from online stalking. Cybperspace should be a place for learning and exploration not a place for fear," babbled Gore the bore.

And in another matter: Sixty-nine percent of the people of the District of Columbia voted in favor of medicinal marijuana. But, some on Capitol hill, lead in part by Rep. Bob Barr (R-GA), attacked the voter initiative, even though it would require a physician to authorize the use of marijuana -- and then mostly just for the relief of major symptoms in patients. Any kid can buy pot just about anywhere in the country, but those who are sick can not benefit by a prescription for marijuana of known quality. That's how idiotic the federal government has become.

At one time it was thought that Sen. Fred Thompson would run for president. Word on the street now is that he's fed up with the idiocy in Washington and may not even run for the Senate again. Instead, he is expected to stay home and run for governor -- a job which would probably be his for the asking. All we can say about that is please do not let Al Gore run for that Senate seat again.

Sen. John McCain tossed his hat into the presidential fracas, running as a Republican. Unfortunately, anyone can say they are a Republican nowadays. However, any real Republicans examining McCain's legislative record can be expected to reject him quickly. Not only is he all over the political spectrum, some of the bills he wanted to pass were positively obnoxious to our Constitutional form of government as well as to freedom.

On the other hand, Clinton and Gore got elected. The liberal media elected Clinton and they are talking like they will start supporting McCain very soon.

Washington politicians like reporters to behave and "repeat" rather than report. Reporters can go after Republicans all they wish, but most of them have learned to toe the party line with Democrats. So, when Paul Sperry, the Washington bureau chief of Investor's Business Daily, mentioned the lack of press conferences to Clinton at a function, Clinton asked "why." Sperry told him simply: "The American people have a lot of questions about illegal money from China and the campaign-finance scandal." Wrong answer. Clinton threw a ten minute temper tantrum and Sperry is now persona non grata at the White House. So much for the people's need to know.

It's Washington as usual.

The socialists at the United Nations are still planning to tax us. First they wanted a tax on international money exchanges and telephone calls. They quickly got a few complaints. So, now they're going after the Internet.

First, they said that "the Internet is an easy vehicle for trafficking in drugs, arms and women through nearly untraceable networks." Obviously, they do not have the slightest idea what they are talking about. That is, unless someone developed a new style modem that allows the quick transfer of matter through wires.

But that's not the only silliness in the 1999 "Human Development Report," http://www.undp.org/hdro/99.htm commissioned by the United Nations Development Program. According to the report, we are to participate in "a race to lay claim to knowledge." But others in the world are having a problem keeping up with some of us. So, in order to close "the global gap between haves and have-nots, between knows and know-nots," we are to hold back a little and give the "know-nots" the money to equip themselves with good computers so they can catch up to us.

"Globalization has swung open the door to opportunities," the report states. It claims that the world is now made up of "shrinking space, shrinking time and disappearing borders," so we must all share in the wealth -- or something like that.

The Report calls for an agenda to reform global governance so as to ensure greater equity, new regional approaches to "collective action" and national policies to capture opportunities in the global marketplace and translate them more equitably into human advance. Whatever that silly babble means.

The bottom line is, they want governments to tax the Internet to help underdeveloped countries get access to the network. According to this proposal, the Internet is "the fastest-growing tool of communication ever," with the number of users expected to grow from 150 million today to more than 700 million in 2001. But, they whine, many of those who most need access cannot obtain it. An invisible barrier has emerged that, "true to its name, is like a world wide web, embracing the connected and silently, almost imperceptibly, excluding the rest."

They also complain that English is used in almost 80 per cent of web sites but fewer than one in ten people worldwide speaks the language. Then they really show their ignorance of the Internet by proposing a system of Internet governance -- financed by the tax, of course.

"Governance of the Internet should be widened to bring in the needs and concerns of developing countries. [And] To ensure that the global communications revolution is truly global, funding is required." We are the funding.

"Global inequalities in income and living standards have reached grotesque proportions." Therefore, the Report suggests a "bit tax" on data sent through the Internet. A tax of one US cent on every 100 lengthy e-mails would generate well over $70 billion a year, they say. "Reinventing global governance is not an option -- it is an imperative for the 21st century," the UN report demands. And we in the United States are the ones they see as best able to pay.

"The Internet has the potential to offset inequalities in the global community, but if we don't take action it will only reinforce them," said Kate Raworth, one of the report's co-authors.

Socialism personified, in other words. They want to redistribute the wealth, starting with our wealth.

But, we are happy to report, at least one important leader in Congress has a correct opinion on that report. House Majority Leader Dick Armey (R-TX) states unequivocally:

Rich countries have more access to the Internet than poor countries? Of course! But just 10 years ago, even the richest countries had little Internet access. The Internet has reached more people faster than any other technological advance -- telephones, automobiles, televisions. Taxing the Internet is not the way to expand its global reach.

When we announced our e-Contract with High Tech America, we said that we would continue to fight against unnecessary and burdensome taxes on the Internet. U.S taxpayer dollars should not be used to support UN reports pushing this kind of redistribution policy. I urge the Administration to reject this report and the policy suggestions it makes.

So do a few million American citizens, Mr. Armey. So do a few million American citizens.

Anyway, if there is to be a "race to lay claim to knowledge," there will, by definition of the word "race," be some winners and some losers. For the moment, Americans are the winners, and we plan to keep that position. We do the work, we reap the benefits. That's the way things work.

Now that the primary campaign season is about to ramp up and many of us will have an opportunity to actually speak with presidential and Congressional candidates, perhaps some "gotcha" type questions are appropriate. In fact, we would suggest that written replies are also requested. Below are 10 suggestions for questions.

1. We are tired of politicians and bureaucrats continually "spinning" everything told the people because we equate "spin" with lie. What will you do to force politicians and government employees to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but to truth to the American people?

2. Many departments and agencies of the federal government are performing functions not authorized to the federal government by the Constitution. What can we depend on you to do to insure the federal government properly performs those duties tasked to it by the Constitution and stops interfering in those areas in which the Constitution gives the federal government no authority?

3. Our Constitution instructs that gold and silver coin, or at least money backed by gold and silver reserves, be used as currency in all States. Yet, we have fiat script instead. Whatever happened to the currency the Constitution instructs be available to the people and what do you plan to do to make this type of money available to the American people again?

4. Our borders are not properly protected. Consequently, many thousands of illegal aliens sneak into our country daily. This is causing serious problems in many States, yet little or nothing is done. What will you do to rid our country of the millions of illegal aliens currently squatting here and to protect our borders in the future?

5. The personal Liberty and privacy of American citizens is under constant jeopardy. Americans are searched at airports and federal buildings. Personal data is collected by many federal agencies. Acting as though they are operating under an unconstitutional general search warrant, bureaucrats freely enter and search private property and act as though they have a right to riffle through our personal and business papers and demand other personal information. What will you do to protect our Fourth and Fifth Amendment rights to privacy and to move about and function in society as we please without having our actions impeded or questioned by bureaucrats?

6. The unconstitutional actions and obnoxious attitude of the Internal Revenue Service have been documented and published for many years; yet nothing is done. Do you believe that some federal bureaucrats should be able to violate a citizen's Constitutional rights with impunity, or will you set strong penalties for those who would violate our Fourth and Fifth Amendment rights under the guise of bureaucratic expediency?

7. Russia, China and North Korea all have nuclear weapons pointed at us and either have or are working on delivery systems that can send many such weapons to any American city. Our national security is, therefore, in jeopardy. What, exactly, will you demand be done to protect our country against this type of attack from a foreign governments?

8. Justice in this country is unequal. Those in government, and their friends, launder funds with impunity -- for political campaigns or other reasons -- and regularly violate many federal laws. Multinational industries do the same. Yet, they are never imprisoned. Even when CIA contract workers imported tons of cocaine into the United States with the protection of the Justice Department, no one was arrested. What will you do to insure that all laws apply to all people in the country equally?

9. Forfeiture -- one of the primary reasons the American people originally went to war with England -- has again become popular with unscrupulous officials. Yet, forfeiture is never applied to government officials who violate the law, the rich who violate the law or to multinational businesses that violate the law. The practice of forfeiture is usually only used on those most unable to afford the court action necessary to get their property back. It is, therefore, little more than thievery by badge. What will you do to forevermore ban this atrocious practice in the United States?

10. Federal officials tell the American people that there is a budget surplus. Yet, the Social Security fund is empty because the money was pilfered by Congress over the years. Many federal agencies have debt levels not reported in the budget. And the national debt level is still increasing. We see, therefore, that the identified budget surplus seems to be as phony as the fiat money held out to the American people as Constitutional currency. What, exactly, will you do to trim back the federal government, conserve on taxpayer's funds, pay off the national debt and put us on a stable monetary system?

  ** 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.

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