Heads Up A Weekly edition of News from around our country May 2, 1997 #33 by: Doug Fiedor fiedor19@eos.net ---------------------------------------------------------- Previous Editions at: http://mmc.cns.net/headsup.html ---------------------------------------------------------- ANOTHER WELFARE SCAM Did you know that each and every American taxpayer has invested an average of $70,000 in the LBJ Great Society welfare programs? It's true. Because, to date, the bill for the Johnson Administration's welfare society is over $7-Trillion. Worse, did you know that the real reason President Johnson started the Great Society welfare programs was to "lock in" the poor vote for the Democrats? Using very explicit language that will not be quoted here, Johnson admitted just that on more than one occasion. That was a rather expensive taxpayer financed "get out the vote" program! Any American worker over 40 probably has enough money invested in the Great Society welfare system to buy a house. And, what did we get for all that money? Our inner-cities now look like bombed-out war zones. Teenage out-of-wedlock births are up a few hundred percent, crime is up a few hundred percent, ditto for drug addiction, and the welfare rolls exploded as a result of all that free money. Yet, the number of "poor" in society increased, rather than decreased. Clearly, something is not working. That's because, simply put, government interference in our personal lives does not work. It never has. Not anywhere. Other than national defense, there is no federal program that works better than private sector efforts. So . . . now Slick Willie wants to mobilize the private sector as "paid" volunteers. Yeah. "Paid" volunteers. He wants government to give tax breaks to businesses that offer time off with pay to "volunteers." Also, Slick wants state and local governments to do the same. Many of us watched part of that volunteer fiasco in Philadelphia. That audience was made up primarily of "paid" volunteers. Heck, you don't think for a moment that Slick's security force would allow "normal" folks to attend such a function, do you? Nope, these were government workers and union people. Most were screened, and paid to be there. And, as for the people on welfare -- the ones who already have plenty of time on their hands and very well could volunteer? As Rep. Jesse Jackson, Jr. says, even to make them clean up their own area would be involuntary servitude. Go figure. We working folk can take the time to come clean up their neighborhoods for them. But we cannot ask the ones sitting on their butts all day to do something to benefit their own areas. Something is definitely wrong with this picture, folks. FRAUD AND CORRUPTION One would think that the function of the national news media is to bring you the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. That's what they would like us to think, anyway. It ain't so, though! Not with our liberal media. For instance, here's an obviously easy question: Which vice-president of the Democratic National Committee (DNC) actually fled the country because of his illegal actions during the last election? And yes, one DNC vice-president did flee the country in fear of Congressional committee and FBI investigations. But really, it's not in the news. Not the complete story, anyway. The national media conveniently forgets to tell us that John Huang was (is?) a DNC vice-president. But there's even more to this story. John Huang did not work in a vacuum. He had a boss, a leader, a compatriot, a co-conspirator. Anyone remember who John Huang's boss was over at the Democratic National Committee? You will not hear it on the nightly news folks, because Senator Christopher Dodd (D-Conn.) is a protected liberal. Nevertheless, as National Chairman of the DNC, Dodd was John Huang's direct supervisor and co-conspirator in all the illegal fund-raising activities. Slick Willie and his co-president directed much of the show from the protection of their White House perch, of course. But there is a whole cast of characters over at the Democratic National Committee who are also culpable. Under the direction of the Clintons, Gore and Christopher Dodd, they broke the law. Worse, they actively conspired to violate the law, and they did it frequently. Now that they're caught, their reply is to fervently search for heretofore unconsidered dirt on the Republican National Committee. The intention, apparently, is that if they can show that the Republicans may have broken the law occasionally, there will be cause to forgive the Democrat's continued illegal money-laundering activities. These are our national lawmakers, folks. They do not respect the law. They do not obey the law. They are, in a word, corrupt! Yet, they still expect us to honor every word of the tripe they put out. These are not honest people. Yet, they have unlimited power over American citizens. Let's change that. Through the bums out! By the way: In the past, some politicians have questioned our statement of the federal government having "unlimited power" over the people of America. Our return question has always been simple: "Name one Constitutionally guaranteed right that has not recently been severely limited." They cannot. And that silence, folks, is the whole of the story in a nutshell. A LEGAL DICTATORSHIP Federal law 50 USC 2251 should be studied by all Americans. The law creates the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and specifically gives it dictatorial powers over American citizens during any type of emergency. Worse, look how Section 2-203 defines "emergency": "For the purposes of this Order, 'civil emergency' means any accidental, natural, man-caused, or wartime emergency or threat thereof, which causes or may cause substantial injury or harm to the population or substantial damage to or loss of property." Got it? That sure is rather vague and open ended! It is an emergency because they say it is an emergency! ". . . any . . . or threat thereof. . . " No other criteria are necessary. The rest are just excess words. Under this law, an emergency gives FEMA powers to do just about anything. They can take over all communications, all medical establishments, all business, relocate people as necessary, send citizens to work in any place necessary and at any wage designated, pass any and all rules and regulations, control all military and civilian policing, limit travel, etc., etc. In other words, they control your body, your labor, your property, and under a related banking regulation, can even confiscate your bank account. Neat, huh? And by the way, Congress and the civilian courts have no authority after a president declares an emergency. Someone in Congress once said that only Stalin had more power than the administration under the emergency and war powers act. But that is not necessarily true. Through FEMA, the administration can also declare martial law and inflict strict curfews with shoot on sight regulations. Or, they can try the offending citizens in a quasi-military court and hang them -- without any right of appeal. The agency already has a large police force, complete with SWAT teams. It also has the use of that marauding Army unit that has been "practicing" live-fire military attacks on metropolitan areas throughout the country. Have you noticed that FEMA always brings lots of guns to any natural disaster? That is not because guns will help against floods or hurricanes, folks. The guns are in case they want to shoot citizens. Because federal agencies have the executive, legislative and judicial branches rolled into one unit, they are often said to operate like little Soviet Politburos. FEMA is no different. In any type of major emergency, FEMA actually becomes a real American Politburo! It is responsible to no one, other than the president. And, it has full authority to control everything, other than the president. Under the law, only the president may declare a national emergency, and only the president may end it. Remember that, the next time you vote. Also remember that this same opportunity was allowed by Article 48 of the German Constitution in the 1930's. Therefore, the German President -- Hitler -- was also able to suspend the Constitution by presidential decree alone. Shall we also wait for a dictator before we attempt to change our laws? Some emergency and war powers are necessary. If the United States is attacked, we would want the president to have the power to take swift and decisive action. But, that action is to be directed against the enemy, not American citizens. And then, when the action is over, so too must any emergency declarations end. These powers are Constitutional, and could become necessary; but only in time of war. The law enacting FEMA is something other than Constitutional. In fact, it is a clear and present danger to the Constitution and our American way of life. SERFS OR MODERN SHARE CROPPERS Share-cropping became common in the United States after the Civil War. Back then, many Southern plantations had ample land, but little money to pay wages. At the same time, a large segment of the population was left impoverished, with little prospect of earning an adequate living. So, it is was little surprise that the landed people -- those with the means of producing a product -- contracted with the poor, who had labor to offer, to produce a product from which both might profit. Share croppers normally received a home, the necessary tools, farm animals, and sometimes even some education, for their labor. They also received a share in the profit -- usually, about half -- from the fruits of their labor. This arrangement was somewhat similar to the arrangement of the serfs of England. Both groups were tied to the land owner. Both paid half of the product of their labor for the privilege of living and working on the land. And, with both, the amount of freedom allowed to the workers by the landowners was often quite arbitrary. Usually, the land owner told them what they will do, how they are to do it and when they were expected to do it. For instance, the land owners wished to insure that everyone in the family would be available to work the fields during the growing season. To that end, they even suspended education every summer. Today, few of us work the fields. Yet, are we less of a share-cropper? Clearly, half of all the proceeds of our labor is still paid to the ultimate landowner, the government. Unlike serfs or share-croppers, we must now purchase the land on which we live. Yet, the ultimate landowner -- the government -- still instructs us on what we may or may not do with that land. There was a time in our common law when it was taught that "Every man's house is his castle; and even though the winds of heaven may blow through it, the King may not enter." That was, of course, to include the sheriff, the tax collector, and all other police officers too. However, the Lords and Ladies of Congress did not find this common law maxim expedient to the expressed goals of modern government. Consequently, they found ways to totally trash the concept. Not to be outdone by the original land-barons of old, today's government has decreed "servient estate" over our property to itself. That is, federal, state and local governments have passed laws allowing government agents easement to our private property. Consequently, not only can today's government place restrictions on the use of private property, government agents may now search and seize private property almost at will. You think not? Violate some incomprehensible wetland law and the Army (Corps of Engineers) comes after you. Forget to pay property tax, or what the IRS says you owe, and men with guns come to run you off of your land. And, God forbid some farmer would grow a crop that is not politically correct. . . . A court trial is no longer usually necessary to confiscate private property. But, even if there is cause for trial, first you must relinquish possession of your property to the applicable government agency. Then, you may go to trial. Adding insult to injury, the Supreme Court recently approved government's taking of private property by saying that forfeiture was different than punishment. This opinion gave police, and most other government agencies, cart blanche to confiscate private property for a whole host of reasons. And they do. There is great incentive for government agencies to confiscate private property. By law, they then use the proceeds from selling forfeited property to supplement the agency's budget. So too with the concept of privacy. Like the land owner of old, today's government keeps very good records on its citizens. Hundreds of citizen databases exist throughout the country, containing everything from education, criminal and medical to financial records. Worse, all of these databases will soon all be connected, allowing any bureaucrat to instantly compile a complete dossier on any American citizen. Today's government schools no longer teach much about the relationship between the European serf and Master. Nor do they teach much about the tenuous relationship between the Southern share-croppers and land owners. Perhaps there is good reason for that. APRIL 19th MEDIA HYPE Or: The Confrontation That Never Happened By: Robert A. Ireland, Editor, Mad Dog Today is April 22. It is now "Doomsday plus Two" for those who were predicting, dare I say hoping for, a violent confrontation between the militia and the Federal Government. It is two days after the citizens of this country had been told to be prepared to see the "angry white men" attack all that is good and decent, the FBI or the BATF. Maybe, if we were very lucky, we would get to see both. At least that was what the talking heads from the networks, and the teases disguised as news updates each night, led us to believe. Well folks, just like a bad "Geraldo" episode, nothing happened. Nada! Zip! Zilch! The missing A-10 did not go ballistic. The revolution did not start. The Bastille was not stormed. Life continues just as it did yesterday and as it most likely will tomorrow. Don't get me wrong. I'm not complaining that nothing happened. I am relieved that this was all a contrived feeding frenzy by our national media. Mad Dog is getting too old for a full blown (un)civil war. This old dog can still bite. It's just I would rather sun myself on the porch. My gripe is with the media. They fed this frenzy to the point that the most powerful nation in the world was portrayed cowering behind barricades in fear of its own citizens. This is a picture not unfamiliar to Europeans. They watch their respective governments hide behind barriers after each new repressive law. However, it was unfamiliar to Americans before the current Administration came to power. It was unfamiliar before it became popular for the media to portray anyone who demands the government actually OBEY the Constitution, as "angry white men." This, of course, conveniently ignores the fact that there are growing numbers of citizens from all ethnic and economic backgrounds that now demand the very same thing. The media, entrusted by the founding fathers with the responsibility of watchdog over the actions of the government, have come to the point where they now select news on its ability to generate points in the ratings. The constant litany of impending doom recited every evening has led to the point where even the agencies of the government believe the propaganda and hunker down behind their barricades in fear. This, in turn, leads to this damaging piece of film footage on the evening news: All see the greatest nation on earth's government hiding from its citizens, like common tyrants afraid of the clamoring mob. Only in this case there was NO clamoring mob. Only empty streets and barricaded Federal buildings and the terrible theater they provided. Wait a minute! Has Mad Dog gone soft on the government? Not a bit! I know the media did not cause the problems that brought about the conditions that allowed this to happen. The media has, however, failed in its function as watchdog of the government. Opting instead for the sensational, substituting fear mongering for news gathering, they have provided a climate that acts to provide that which could, and should, have been avoided. When this happens those in our government that would pervert our Constitution, and steal our birthright as Americans, know that no one is watching them. Politicians know that, without this oversight, they will be able to accomplish that which they would never have been able to if someone was watching their actions. The media's pandering to sensationalism breeds fear in the ordinary citizen. This in turn leads to the citizen pleading with the very person the media was supposed to be watching; the politician that knows no one is watching. The citizen asks for protection from the evil the media sensationalism has created, instead of dealing with the root causes of the problems. There's that media watchdog thing again. The citizen pleads until the politicians find a solution. The solution requires the loss of a little bit of your Constitutionally guaranteed liberty, but you are told you will be safer. The politician never tells you that, in fact, you won't be safer. This is due to the cumulative effect of the gradual erosion of the Constitutional guarantees to liberty. He just smiles for the camera, throws his arm around the first available citizen, and pedals his or her lies. The media hails the new legislation as insightful and long overdue, failing to even grasp that they are now becoming victims of their own sensationalism. Worse yet, they have become the willing accomplice to the destruction of our Constitutional guarantees. When they quit fawning over this piece of "long overdue" legislation they get busy and latch on to the next "flash-point." The talking heads begin to milk it for all the rating points it will generate, thus beginning, again, the loss of Liberty by starting the three step process anew. Has anyone forgotten the media hype about the "race card" in the OJ trial and the resultant call for a change in our 200 year old jury system? As we become more accustomed to sound bite journalism, we demand more "quick fix" solutions. We are failing to understand that quick fix corrections based upon aberrations are not corrections, but the beginning of new and greater problems. The media generates this kind of problem without even giving it a thought. After all, they don't make the laws, and they have long ago deluded themselves into believing that what they are presenting is the news. That's the sad part, people. The media has drifted so far from its position as governmental watchdog (the so called Fourth Estate) that it has forgotten its duty to the public is to gather news, not titillate the viewers. Because it provides entertainment in place of the news, we have finally come to the point that we were able to watch our government cowering in fear; afraid of the media proclaimed hordes that were supposed to attack on a given date. Because the media failed its duty to the public, just as those cowering behind the barricades had failed theirs, we were treated to this embarrassment. All Americans should be ashamed of that film footage. Remember those barricaded Federal buildings, and the fear of the American Citizen they represented. Remember those empty streets and the mob that never clamored for the head of the tyrant. While you are remembering, keep in mind that those expected to cause trouble, the mob that never showed up, are the ones demanding the government clean up its act and OBEY the Constitution. A job the media discarded long ago. Note: The above editorial is used with permission from the Mad Dog Newsletter. SHORTS FROM VARIOUS SOURCES According to the EEOC, an employer may not ask job applicants if they have a history of mental illness. The employer must, however, make a whole host of special provisions for such a worker. This can include extra time off of work, altering work assignments and complete physical changes in the workplace to accommodate the person. Hostility to co-workers, chronic tardiness and even full blown schizophrenia are now included in the problems to be tolerated in the workplace. Thank Congress. Again. Tree-huggers recently invented another new term. According to the World Resources Institute (WRI), old growth forests and wilderness is now to be called "frontier forests." WRI says that these frontier forests are those which are undisturbed, and relatively unmanaged by humans. And, of course, they say that these places are in need of saving before they totally disappear. Here's another environmental scam on the American public: EPA intentionally funnels a lot of grant money to groups, like the Natural Resources Defense Council and the American Lung Association, that can be expected to sue the agency. For instance, the American Lung Association has sued EPA six times demanding tougher air quality standards. EPA welcomes these lawsuits because it ultimately wins by losing. The judges expand the agency's power while insulating it from congressional critics. In a total assault on our right to liberty, the FAA issued a call for comments on a FAA proposal to require airlines to collect substantial personal information on each passenger -- including full name, address, next of kin, Social Security Number and date of birth. They say that the purpose of this collection would be to facilitate identification of victims of airplane crashes. The proposal anticipates that passengers would have to provide this information in order to board an aircraft. The information will, of course, be computerized and available to any and all government agencies. Americans now spend 128 days each year-- this year, until May 9 -- working to pay their taxes. That means every penny earned by the average worker between January 1 and May 8 must go solely to pay government taxes. Put another way, the average American must work 2 hours and 49 minutes every working day to pay all their taxes. In fact, 1 hour and 53 minutes of every work day is devoted specifically to paying federal taxes. On top of that, a House Ways and Means Committee report says that the Clinton/Gore budget contains 44 separate tax hikes adding up to $150.6 billion over the next 10 years. At the Capitol, members of a House bipartisan ethics task force are discussing a proposal to ease the restrictions on gifts that lawmakers imposed on themselves only 16 months ago. The House's current rule prohibits House members, officers and employees from accepting a range of gifts, with exceptions provided for those from relatives, personal friends and other members of the House. In general, according to Republican and Democratic staff aides, senior lawmakers tend to favor relaxing the restriction on gifts while more junior House members, who tend to be more reform-minded, generally oppose it. -- End --