Some say it's something in the water there. Some blame it on all the campaign funds (bribes) needed to be collected from special interest lobbyists to stay in office. Others say it's that sensual sense of complete power and control many of the Lords and Ladies of Capitol Hill develop after being there over a year.

They start out with the best of intentions, never doubting for a second they would violate their oath of office. But how soon they forget!

"All Legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress," the first sentence of the body our Constitution begins. Which means, Congress shall make all law.

Knowing full well that Congress should not have the time to burden the American people with too many stupid laws, the authors of the Constitution mandated lawmaking authority only to Congress. But, Congress did not wish to be burdened with the nuts and bolts of making law, so they allowed regulatory agencies to do their dirty work. Congress wanted expediency. So they unconstitutionally delegated a lot of their authority to unelected bureaucrats.

Today, very few Members of Congress give a damn about the Constitution or the rights of the people. Instead, they are interested in getting reelected and limiting the actions of the American people, in that order. If there is a third point (a few may have one), generally speaking, peer pressure mandates that they not let it show. Because, by their third year in office, many of them turn into little more than money-grubbing control freaks.

Let's not talk specifically about our own representative or senators. Rather, let's look at the facts, the results, the shame that the whole of the Congress is responsible for perpetrating on the American people.

For instance, according to the U.S. General Accounting Office, between April 1, 1996, and September 30, 1999, the federal government's regulatory bureaucracy issued 15,280 final rules. Out of those 15,280 rules, 222 were major rules which caused an economic impact (hidden tax) of more than $100 million on the American people. Some inflicted a hidden tax of many billions of dollars. Not one was approved by Congress.

They call these little ditties "rules" or "regulations" to get around the Constitution. However, they are really laws. We know that because, violate one of these unconstitutional bureaucratic proclamations and government will send men with guns to take you to court. Protest a little and those men with guns are authorized to kill you.

Rules and regulations were supposed to be those instructions limiting the actions of government employees, not the people. All of Washington knows that the regulatory agencies are unconstitutional. The U.S. Supreme Court stated so many times. But, because the Roosevelt administration badgered and threatened the decrepit old men on the Court, the weak willed nine in black robes allowed central government socialism to become our way of life. Today, the Court still fears rectifying the error.

Only lately have five on the Supreme Court found the courage to interpret parts of the Constitution properly. But, the administration and Congress will have none of it. The administration wants complete control of everything. And Congress, as a body, wants the Court to butt out of protecting our Constitutional rights -- even as the Court slowly attempts to limit only some of the authority of the central government back to only that granted by the Constitution.

This time it is an atrocious piece of legislation -- S-746, the Regulatory Improvement Act of 1999 -- by Senators Carl Levin (D-MI) and Fred Thompson (R-TN). S-746 is said to be "A bill to provide for analysis of major rules, to promote the public's right to know the costs and benefits of major rules, and to increase the accountability of quality of Government."

The bill's title is a misnomer. The bill allows very broad agency rulemaking discretion. S-746 would allow an agency to adopt a major rule without even doing the presently required cost-benefit analysis. All an agency need say is that it finds "good cause" that conducting the regulatory analysis before the rule becomes effective is impracticable.

GAO reported in 1998 that agencies lack consistency and clarity in their regulatory economic analysis methods and reporting. This bill compounds that. Each agency would be allowed to adopt its own analytical guidelines. The bill also gives an agency greater opportunity to justify any regulation but will not give the public access to information or the legal tools needed to hold an agency accountable.

And herein lies the crux of the situation: Section 627(d) states: "The cost-benefit analysis, cost- benefit determination under section 623(d), and any risk assessment required under this subchapter shall not be subject to judicial review separate from review of the final rule to which such analysis or assessment applies."

Section 634 reaffirms the above: "The exercise of the authority granted under this subchapter by the President, the Director, or the Administrator shall not be subject to judicial review in any manner."

In other words, we little serf-citizens are supposed to take whatever the Washington bureaucracy wants to throw at us and keep our mouths shut about it. There are twenty senators signed on to S-746 at this time. We wonder what the bottom line was for them. That is, how much they were paid by special interest lobbyists to do that.

For more information, see The Heritage Foundation report at: http://www.heritage.org/library/backgrounder/bg1336.html

Former first lady Barbara Bush, who was always held in high esteem on this end, went campaigning for her son's presidential campaign and seemed to forget she was in public. Mrs. Bush called Pat Buchanan "a whiny child" for quitting the Republican Party to run for president as a Reform Party candidate.

Well, Mrs. Former First Lady, you may not like it, but Pat Buchanan was correct:

Our two parties have become nothing but two wings of the same bird of prey. ... Both write laws with lobbyists looking over their shoulders. Both embrace the unprincipled politics of triangulation.

That truism will soon go down in history as the first shot across the bow of the modern Washington political machine centralizing power and obstructing the rights of the people. George Sr. cut hundreds of unconstitutional deals while in Congress and as the President under the guise of bipartisanship -- and to go along to get along for more campaign funds.

And, while we're thinking unconstitutional here, how about getting George Jr. to study our Constitution a little before he continues his campaign. His ignorance of our country's founding document is becoming all too obvious. It's embarrassing real Republicans, too.

For instance, the opening paragraph on his web page states: "Governor George W. Bush proposed a series of initiatives to improve school safety, strengthen classroom discipline and promote character development for America's children." All these are laudable goals, just not duties of the federal government. When one looks to the Constitution for federal authority to regulate education programs, it can not be found.

Perhaps if Governor Bush wants to continue doing governor things he should stay in that position. Many of the duties of the President are greatly different from those of a governor.

On ethanol and alternative uses of agricultural products, Junior's web site reports, "Governor Bush is committed to the continuing search for innovative uses for agricultural products, especially environmentally beneficial uses. That is why he supports the ethanol tax benefit."

George Jr. says that "ethanol helps our farmers and makes our air cleaner." It doesn't. The program gives a great tax break to giant corporations rather than American farmers. And, incidentally, it "would not be prudent" for a President to propose such a scheme because there is zero authority authorized by the Constitution for the central government to pay for such things.

And here's another good one: "In the first year of his presidency, Governor Bush will dedicate about $8 billion -- an amount equal to 10 percent of the non- Social Security surplus -- to provide new tax incentives for giving, and to support charities and other private institutions that save and change lives. These efforts will prove, in word and deed, that prosperity has a purpose."

Well, there he goes again, trying to be the national feel-good governor. Let's see someone point to authority for that scheme in the Constitution. It ain't there because it's not part of the job description for the federal government.

George Jr. even wants federally sponsored after-school programs: "Studies indicate after-school programs help reduce drug use, teen pregnancy, and criminal behavior by providing supervised activities during the peak hours for juvenile crime. Unfortunately, some federal after-school programs tend to discourage the participation of faith-based groups and other community organizations."

We are damn sure that federal bureaucrats would really enjoy writing hundreds of rules and regulations for that program -- each and every one supervised by the far- left teacher's unions and other socialists. Which means, that program would soon cost as much as government schools to operate. Besides, like the other proposed programs, this is not a duty of the federal government. Nanny problems are state and local issues.

Then, we get to the gun laws where George Jr. completely loses his Constitutional bearing. Bush supports the current ban on automatic weapons; stronger enforcement of existing gun laws; requiring instant background checks at gun shows; banning juveniles from possession of semi- automatic "assault" weapons; increasing the minimum age for possession of a handgun from 18 to 21; and banning the importation of foreign made "high-capacity" ammunition clips.

Someone please inform Junior that there is no authority in the Constitution for the federal government to pass laws regulating the personal weapons of the American people. Zero. Zilch. Nada. None. It ain't there.

The Constitution is the highest law of the land. Way back in 1803 (Marbury v. Madison), the Supreme Court made it clear to all that: "All laws which are repugnant to the Constitution are null and void." They are unconstitutional.

So, why in the world would we want to hire a President who tells us, even before he is elected, that he has absolutely no intention of honoring our Constitution?

If it were not for the fact that unelected regulatory bureaucrats get to perpetrate their silly, unconstitutional ideas on the general population with the force of law, we could write gut-splitting comedy skits about their antics. However, Congress gave these regulatory bureaucrats immunity against prosecution and the ability to make asinine laws unilaterally. And Congress also authorized them men with guns to attack citizens who laugh at their ridiculous proclamations too much.

Still, there are times when a rip-roaring laugh of "Catch 22" total frustration at their idiocy is appropriate, and one such time was last week. That was when Ida L. Castro, Chairwoman of EEOC, announced that some employers must either commit federal felonies or be heavily fined by EEOC.

The joke on American business started when the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) decided to issue an enforcement edict stating that illegal alien workers can sue employers for discrimination under federal employment discrimination laws.

"This guidance makes clear that the anti- discrimination laws under the Commission's jurisdiction protect all employees across the country, regardless of their [illegal] work status," said EEOC's Castro. "Unauthorized [illegal aliens] workers are especially vulnerable to abuse and exploitation. It is imperative for employers to fully understand that discrimination against this class of employees will not be tolerated and that they will be responsible for appropriate remedies if they violate the civil rights laws."

This is stupid! It is against federal law to hire them. The federal government proposed a massive database in which all Americans must be included so as to catch the undocumented aliens and deport them. However, as of October 26, if an employer finds they have a couple illegal aliens working for them, it may be an actionable discrimination case if that employer fires them.

Castro attempted to explain that the new guidance is fully consistent with the nation's immigration laws, principally the Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA). "If employers were not held responsible for discrimination against unauthorized workers, it would create an incentive for unscrupulous employers to engage in unlawful workplace conduct."

Got that? That's your government at work. Americans are not to discriminate against lawbreakers anymore say unelected bureaucrats. Illegal aliens are to become yet another protected faction, defended against the law-abiding American taxpayer.

Now, let's forget the bureaucratic gobbledygook and go to real laws passed by Congress: 18 USC 3 makes accessory after the fact a felony:

Whoever, knowing that an offense against the United States has been committed, receives, relieves, comforts or assists the offender in order to hinder or prevent his apprehension, trial or punishment, is an accessory after the fact. … An accessory after the fact shall be imprisoned not more than one-half the maximum term of imprisonment or … fined not more than one-half the maximum fine prescribed for the punishment of the principal, or both …

It stands to reason that employing an illegal alien would amount to comforting and assisting the offender and that not reporting the illegal alien would amount to aiding in the prevention of apprehension. And so it is.

Because, now comes 18 USC 4, the misprision of felony law:

Whoever, having knowledge of the actual commission of a felony cognizable by a court of the United States, conceals and does not as soon as possible make known the same to some judge or other person in civil or military authority under the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

This could lead one to believe that they would be required under the law to turn in any illegal aliens, like pronto. Else, one can get up to three years free room and board in the hoosegow.

But, the new EEOC rule states that "employee wrongdoing does not shield a discriminating employer from liability under the civil rights laws." Would that apply to murder, rape, armed robbery, or drug running, too? Apparently.

The rule also states: "Inasmuch as undocumented workers are particularly vulnerable to employer abuse, awarding monetary remedies irrespective of a worker's unauthorized status promotes the goal of deterring unlawful discrimination without undermining the purposes of the immigration laws."

Again, that is a contradiction. Employers should not only have the ability, but the requirement, to dismiss illegal aliens. Because, right now the deal is that if INS catches a business with illegal workers, any aggressive prosecutor can throw all kinds of charges at the employer. Yet, if the employer fires one when learned they are an illegal, the employer can be fined for discrimination by EEOC.

An obvious question comes to mind: If EEOC fines an employer for firing (discriminating against) an illegal alien and the case goes to trial, can a federal prosecutor also charge that employer with employing an illegal alien in the same court action or will they need to bring separate charges?

There's another option, though: Use the misprision of felony law to charge the whole of the EEOC politburo with aiding and abetting and whatever. Our public servants must be forced to obey all laws to the letter. Else, they should immediately be charged and convicted. Government workers must be held to a much higher standard than the average American citizen.

http://www.eeoc.gov/docs/undoc.html

http://www.eeoc.gov/press/10-26-99.html

The popular press was calling the FBI's "Project Megiddo" report "an ominous warning of potential violence associated with the turn of the millennium." The far right was going to attack big government, the media was implying. So, we took a look.

The first important sentence is at the beginning of the first paragraph of page four: "The Project Megiddo intelligence initiative has identified very few indications of specific threats to domestic security."

No matter, though. Later in the very same paragraph they say: "Militias, adherents of racist belief systems such as Christian Identity and Odinism, and other radical domestic extremists are clearly focusing on the millennium as a time of action." Then, just a couple sentences later: "In the final analysis, while making specific predictions is extremely difficult, acts of violence in commemoration of the millennium are just as likely to occur as not." And, the very next sentence carries that thought on but is prefaced with, "in the absence of intelligence . . ."

An "absence of intelligence," we might add, neatly sums up everything about this report.

Anyway, the version posted on the FBI's web site was missing two pages of specific "guidance" given to law enforcement officials. Neil Gallagher, the assistant director of the FBI's national security division, said it was also missing the names of groups who are viewed by the agency as the most dangerous. "We do not want these groups to know these details," Gallagher told reporters.

"The report gives them [police] the history and philosophy of these religious extremists and New World Order groups as a way for law enforcement to understand this phenomenon and to help them see if ideology exists in their communities," Gallagher said. "We are not overreacting or pushing the panic button, but there are always catalysts for acts of terrorism. You have to understand that phenomenon as it relates to the millennium."

The rest of the report took but a few telephone calls to locate. All it contained was more unsubstantiated conjecture and really wasn't worth looking for.

Gallagher tells the media, "We are looking at groups who will use the millennium as an excuse for violence."

We think the FBI is just playing around. Making work. Publicly acting like they are "doing something." Because, there is much more information on all of these groups available on the Internet, on public web pages, than in that FBI report.

The report goes on to justify the FBI's [unsure because of a lack of intelligence] premonition of violence based only on the fact that two or three of the socially impaired miscreants perpetrating violence on Americans over the past few years also owned a copy of an "extremist inspired" book (fiction) called "The Turner Diaries." The report actually says that, "during the year 2000 and beyond, The Turner Diaries will be an inspiration for right-wing terrorist groups to act because it outlines both a revolutionary takeover of the government and a race war."

Yet, there is no word, unfortunately, of what the report's author thinks will inspire left-wing terrorists to instigate riots in our inner-cities if the power goes off or the welfare checks don't come. Surely, the FBI will soon report on the dastardly subversive forces on the far-left, too. Major urban riots are of far more importance to the American public than the potential of a couple disgruntles with guns alone in the woods someplace. Therefore, it would seem to be grossly negligent of the FBI to not release a detailed report on the subversive left immediately.

Anyway, by page nine the report was "interpenetrating" the Bible's Book of Revelation. Not having a strong personal knowledge of the Book of Revelation, I queried a well experienced parish Priest. The good Priest found the report's interpretation somewhat lacking, to put it mildly.

The bottom line of the report seems to be that any Americans who could be for private property rights, home schooling and gun ownership -- while at the same time worry about things like communism, the New World Order, a UN takeover of the US, the Council on Foreign Relations, the Bilderbergers, the Trilateral Commission, or concentration camps -- are probably somehow suspect. And, if they are also practicing Christians, so much the worse. That report, by the way, is decisively anti-Christian.

Based on the amount of research necessary to write the "Project Megiddo" report, the report's layout and the syntax used throughout, the report seems to be of the quality of a high school or junior college term paper. In other words, the report was not written by an experienced FBI agent who has been around the block a few times. Rather, it represents what was called "sophomoric" back in the early 1960s -- a sophomore being defined back then as "one who knows not and knows not that he knows not."

See for yourself at: http://www.fbi.gov/library.htm

 For an interesting report on the type of “experts” the FBI is depending on nowadays to define Christianity in the United States visit: http://www.networkusa.org/fingerprint/page1b/fp-pagans-witches.html

  ** 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.

hu157.htm. Revised 9-11-02. uhuh and GR Force are non-profit.