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 --