Heads Up



   A Weekly edition of News from around our country



		   May 9, 1997   #34



	  by:  Doug Fiedor    fiedor19@eos.net



----------------------------------------------------------

  Previous Editions at:  http://mmc.cns.net/headsup.html

----------------------------------------------------------





FCC SOCIALISM

	The stated intent of the Founding Fathers was 

that "All legislative Powers herein granted shall be 

vested in a Congress of the United States . . ."  In 

fact, the writers of our Constitution were so adamant 

about this that those words are the very first to appear 

in the body of the Constitution.

	Article I, Section 7 of the Constitution further 

designates: "All Bills for raising Revenue shall originate 

in the House of Representatives . . ."

	These two very simple Constitutional rules are 

quite easy to understand:  Only Congress may legislate 

(make law), and only the House of Representatives may 

initiate a bill to raise revenue (taxes).  There are no 

exceptions authorized by our Constitution.

	Everyone elected to a position within the federal 

government, all appointed officials, and every bureaucrat 

hired into government service, takes an oath to support 

and defend our Constitution.  One would think that, in 

turn, they are also promising to "obey" our Constitution.  

But, here's where the rub comes in: they do not.

	For instance, another socialist style tax and 

redistribution of wealth scheme is afoot.  This one comes, 

not from Congress, but from four unelected bureaucrats 

making up the politburo of one of the federal government's 

regulatory agencies.

	The Regulators at the Federal Communications 

Commission announced Wednesday that they are adopting 

what they call a landmark overhaul of the nation's 

telephone charges to better spread the financial pain of 

ensuring affordable phone service for Americans.

	As part of the scheme, FCC plans to boost the 

charge for residential customers with more than one line 

to $5 a month from $3.50, and to roughly $7 from $6 for 

multi-line businesses.

	"Second phone lines for home-based business or 

Internet use and small businesses will be saddled with 

the brunt of these increases," complained the Small 

Business Survival Committee, a small business advocacy 

group.  

	Of course we will suffer the brunt of the 

increase.  Because, small business and homeowners are 

not organized to stop it.  On the other hand, heavy 

telephone users, and those who make large campaign 

contributions, received a major decrease in their 

communications costs from this action.  That's Washington 

politics folks.  He who pays the fiddler calls the tune.

	This time, even a few members of Congress 

registered a minor complaint:  "Any local telephone rate 

increases resulting from the (FCC's) actions to modify 

access charges would be sharply contrary to congressional 

intent in passing (last year's law)," Sen. John McCain 

(R-AZ.) and Reps. W.J. Tauzin (R-La.) and John Dingell 

(D-MI) wrote FCC Chairman Reed Hundt.  Note, however, 

that no member of Congress has yet to mention that the 

FCC has no Constitutional authority to pass any law or 

levy any tax.

	Acting like a Chinese-Communist dictator, FCC 

Politburo Chairman Hundt made his position very clear.  

In a news conference, Hundt stated that an extra telephone 

line in a private home is a "luxury" that "should" be 

taxed for the benefit of others in society.

	But wait, this gets better yet. . . . 

	Where the money is slated to go is rather 

interesting too.  An independent third party, the 

National Exchange Carriers Association, -- not the 

Treasury of the federal government -- will collect and 

dole out funds beginning Jan. 1, 1998.

	Got it?  An independent regulatory agency of 

the federal government is usurping the Constitutional 

authority to make law and levy taxes designated only to 

Congress.  Then, the agency is going to give your money 

to a private group to redistribute as it sees fit.

	Whatever happened to the Representative Republic 

form of government?  Anybody miss it?

	They "say" that this scheme is to pay to provide 

virtually all elementary and secondary schools -- both 

public and private -- with access to the Internet at a 

cut rate.  That's what they say publicly, anyway.  But, 

they lie!  Because, in the fine print they also say that 

state regulators would first have to certify schools' 

technology plans, the school districts would have to 

demonstrate need, the computers would have to be 

available, and blah, blah, blah, blah.

	Meanwhile, using Slick Willie's' own words, sixth 

grade kids can not read or write properly!  Nor do they 

know math, history or science.

	This stupid scheme will change none of that.  It is 

little more than another socialist redistribution of 

wealth plan.  This is more "feel good" liberalism by a 

failed administration searching for a place in history.

	And, if anyone cares anymore, the plan is also 

totally and completely un-Constitutional.

	Tell them so.



WORLD SOCIALISM

	A few weeks back (Feb. 7 issue) we mentioned a 

little about the connection between Bill Clinton, Oxford 

and the socialists at the Fabian Society.  That subject 

is pertinent again because, last week, we got smacked in 

the face with the election of yet another Oxford trained 

Fabian Society world leader, Tony Blair.

	Blair's election is an excellent marker on exactly 

where we are on the road to world socialism.  Because, 

over in England, that type of politics is a little better 

defined than it is here.  Here we have the Democratic 

Party, which should really be renamed the Social-Democrat 

Party.  In England, Tony Blair's party is the Labour 

Party.  They know they are socialists, and they readily 

admit to it.

	But first, a little on how the Fabian Society fits in 

with all this.  To know and understand them, let's go to 

their main document.  The "Rules and Bye Laws of the 

Fabian Society" clearly states:

	"The name of the Society shall be the Fabian 

Society.

	"The Society consists of socialists.  It therefore 

aims at the establishment of a society in which equality 

of opportunity will be assured and the economic power and 

privileges of individuals and classes abolished through 

the collective ownership and democratic control of the 

economic resources of the community.  It seeks to secure 

these ends by the methods of political democracy.

	"It also aims at the implementation of the Charter 

of the United Nations and the Universal Declaration of 

Human Rights.

	"It seeks the creation of effective international 

institutions to uphold and enforce world peace.  The 

Society, believing in equal citizenship in the fullest 

sense, is open to persons, irrespective of sex, race or 

creed, who commit themselves to its aims and purposes 

and undertake to promote its work.

	"The Society shall be affiliated to the Labour 

Party.  . . ."

	And now along comes Tony Blair, a member of the 

Labour Party, Oxford trained and a modern Third Way 

socialist.  Not only is Blair the Bill Clinton of 

England, Clinton even sent part of his propaganda machine 

over to England to help Blair get elected.

	Effectively, these guys are interchangeable.  

Except for the fact that Blair has no corruption in his 

administration yet and his wife has no plans to interfere 

in government, we could probably switch the two without 

noticing much difference in the way either government 

was operated.

	So, it's also very interesting to check into their 

political training.  The Rhodes Scholar program at Oxford 

is a two year indoctrination program for future 

politicians and would take a great deal of time to 

describe.  The Fabian Society, however, gives us a very 

good thumbnail sketch of the material covered at Oxford.

	Just for fun, let's see if we can find a little 

of Bill Clinton's ideals in the Concepts of the Fabian 

Society.  Here are the key tenets as set forth in the 

Fabian Essays, with just a little editorial comment 

following each:

1.	"Elimination of private ownership of land."

	We do not have that yet, nor has it been publicly 

proposed.  However, the federal government already owns 

over a quarter of all land in the United States.

2.	"Government ownership or control of all land."

	Through hundreds of laws, rules and regulations, 

today's federal government "controls" any and all land 

it wishes to control.

3.	"Government ownership or control of major 

industries."

	Through laws, rules and regulations, the federal 

government already controls all business, industry and 

agriculture with a heavy hand.

4.	"Government control over labor."

	Again, this was accomplished years ago through 

a whole series of labor laws, rules and regulations.

5.	"Government control or ownership of communications 

and transportation."

	The federal government owns some means of 

transportation and closely regulates what it does not 

own.  Ditto for communications.

6.	"Government control of all credit."

	Credit is strictly controlled in the United States 

through the quasi-government Federal Reserve Bank and 

a whole host of banking laws, rules and regulations.

7.	"Government control of all insurance."

	Today's federal government runs a whole host of 

insurance programs -- from farm and flood insurance to 

unemployment and medical insurance.  Laws, rules and 

regulations heavily regulate that part of the industry 

not specifically owned and operated by government.

8.	"Government control of the education system."

	Government schools are a fixture in the United 

States.  Recently, the federal government has actively 

instituted programs to control all education from 

Washington.

9.	"Elimination of the significance of the family."

	Federal welfare programs have done an excellent 

job of relieving citizens of what we once called parental 

responsibility.  Soon we will also even have a state 

sponsored baby-sitter system.

10.	"Elimination of the significance of religion."

	This is only just beginning, but is already pervasive 

throughout the United States.  Even now, there is strong 

public criticism of the Christian ideals which made this 

country great.

11.	"Justified use of force if necessary to attain 

socialistic goals."

	From military enforcement of civil rights laws to 

tax collectors supported by SWAT teams, the use of 

force to attain social goals is well established in this 

country.

12.	"Establishment of a minimum wage and a maximum 

working class."

	The United States has had minimum wage laws for 

many years.  We do not, however, maximize the labor force 

because the employment to unemployment ratio is a tool 

used by the federal government to fight inflation.  

Therefore, our federal government strives to insure that 

a certain level of the population is always unemployed.

13.	"A universal system of pensions."

	The federal government operates a whole system 

of pension plans which cover most of the country's 

population, the best known being Social Security.

	Well folks, that about sums it up.  A few of the 

above points need a little work yet.  But Slick Willie is 

moving right along with the program.  That there is zero 

Constitutional authority for the federal government to do 

any of these things is, well . . . inconsequential.  The 

cold hard fact is that the federal government is already 

doing them!

	Our only hope of beating socialism, if there is 

any hope left, is to start now supporting good 

Constitutional candidates for next years Congressional 

election.



BUREAUCRATS TAKE PRIVATE LAND

	Is your private property private?  Nope!  Not 

anymore.  Not from an ever oppressive federal government, 

anyway.

	The federal government owns one-quarter to one-

third of all land in the United States.  One would think 

that would be more than enough to handle any little 

breeding or protection project they might want to 

pursue.  But, it is not.  They want to preempt the use 

of private property, too.

	In fact, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has 

it's eye on a whopping 28,125 square miles (18 million 

acres) of private land it wants severely regulated under 

habitat conservation plans.  To the Fish and Wildlife 

bureaucrats, rodents, bugs and weeds are more important 

than people, so they are going to take over people's 

property to propagate the pests.

	For instance, they want a total of 1.6 million 

acres in Washington for the spotted owl, marbled 

murrelet, salmon, and steelhead trout.  In North 

Carolina, they want 300,000 acres for something called 

the red-cockaded woodpecker.  In Riverside County, 

Calif. they want 540,000 acres for the Stephens' kangaroo 

rat.  In Arkansas they want another 233,000 acres for 

even more red-cockaded woodpeckers.  In Oregon it's 

another 210,000 acres for that stupid northern spotted 

owl again.  And in Washington again, yet another 55,000 

acres for even more northern spotted owls.

	Here's a quick thought:  If there are enough 

northern spotted owls around that they require over 

1,865,000 acres (2,914 square miles) in which to breed, 

exactly how many of the damn things do we have to have 

in the United States before they are no longer considered 

endangered?

	Funny thing is that any of these things can 

easily be bred in captivity.  Put a price on them and 

we'll suddenly have more than anyone wants.

	But instead, the bureaucrats steal the use of 

people's land.

	Maybe that's all they wanted in the first place.  

Control.



CHINA WANTS OUR MONEY

	It seems that China suddenly feels free to 

publicly tell our politicians how things are going to be.  

Apparently they must have bought quite a lot of influence 

in Washington -- enough to make our politicians shut up, 

anyway.

	If you remember, they made a fool of Gore while he 

was there.  Of course, Gore made that easy for them, as 

he habitually does everywhere he goes.  But that's not 

the point.  Usually, in diplomatic circles, they cover up 

anything that makes anyone look foolish.  With Gore, 

they met with him, used him for a few photo 

opportunities, then sent him on his way to play tourist.

	Then Newt showed up in China.  And, Newt being 

Newt, told them exactly what he thought about Hong Kong, 

Taiwan, the fund raising scandal, and whatever.  That 

raised a few concerns with the Chinese big-wigs.  So much 

so, in fact, that they actually called in their 

ambassador to ask about how much political clout this 

legislator really wields.

	Meanwhile, no one thanked the Chinese for all the 

campaign money, so Slick Willie had to call.  Slick also 

had to explain to the Chinese leadership how the 

deniability program works in politics, because they were 

getting the sequence of things all screwed up.

	You see, when blamed for making illegal campaign 

contributions, the Chinese leadership started out with 

the excuse the "everyone does it."  They pointed out, and 

rightly so, that countries like Taiwan and Israel have a 

long history of laundering money to funnel to American 

politicians.  However, after their little talk with Slick, 

they reverted to step one of the Clinton program:  Deny 

everything.

	Now comes Tung Chee-hwa, the shipping tycoon 

chosen by China to be Hong Kong's chief executive 

beginning July 1.  This guy is not very well known in the 

United States yet, but he will be.

	When questioned about the decrease in rights the 

people of Hong Kong will experience after China takes 

over he made a very surprising point:  The citizens of 

Hong Kong will still have more rights and liberties that 

the citizens of the United States.

	Oops . . . that was not exactly what out American 

politicians wanted to hear!  And, that point was well 

taken.  Because, if you notice, we do not hear much mouth 

noise about that coming from our elected ones lately. . . .

	Yes, Tung told the press this week, some types 

of public protests will be prohibited under his 

administration.  Specifically, rallies advocating 

independence for Tibet, Taiwan or Hong Kong will be 

prohibited.  Other types of protests, however, are 

acceptable.

	He explained that the "national sovereignty issue 

is very sensitive with a whole lot of Chinese people."  

So, under proposals introduced last month, people wishing 

to stage public rallies will be required to seek police 

permission first.  And the police will be able to ban 

rallies if "national security" is threatened. 

	Gee, does that system sound familiar to anyone here?

	"I lived in America during the '60s," Tung said.  "I 

saw what happened with the slow erosion of authority, and 

the society became less orderly than is desirable.  I 

certainly don't want to see this happen" in Hong Kong.  

He also said that his responsibility is to keep the 

territory free from instability or meddling by outsiders.

	Tung also told the press that the American 

fund-raising scandal involving the Clinton White House 

showed how sensitive the issue of foreign involvement in 

politics has become, not only in Hong Kong but worldwide.

	"What's happening now in Washington, the question of 

which money is coming from where, this is a very 

sensitive issue in America.  It's a sensitive issue in 

many countries.  Why should it not be a sensitive issue 

in Hong Kong?  Hong Kong is a small place.  It's 

vulnerable."

	So, in diplomatic speak, Tung said that Americans 

may still do business with and in Hong Kong, but we had 

better shut up when the subject turns to government.

	China, after all, wants all those American dollars 

to keep flowing their way.  They need the money to buy 

arms.  Arms to defend against us.

	Our annual trade deficit with communist China 

alone is so huge that if that much money were available 

to Americans, it would be enough to keep every person in 

any one of our smaller states living comfortably.  China 

still exports goods to us produced by slave labor.  Most 

of the Chinese Christian population is in prison camps.  

And China publicly stated that they are teaming up with 

Russia to remove all American influence from that half of 

the world.

	Meanwhile, the Clinton administration did shut 

up, and is letting China get away with pretty much 

anything it pleases.

	Go figure.



THIRD WAY VAMPIRISM

Or:  What is money?   by:  Bill Kasper

	Even before the written word, men engaged in 

trade.  In fact, the oldest example of human writing is 

an accounting record from Sumeria detailing cattle 

transactions between merchants.  This gives us some idea 

of the ancient and probably genetic nature of man's 

desire to engage in mercantile endeavors.  Trade and 

commerce are as inherently human as love and bi-pedal 

ambulation (walking on two legs).  Mankind as he exists 

today could not have come into being without the exchange 

of goods and services between individuals and groups.

	As the collapse of various communist countries 

taught us, attempts to extinguish or greatly curtail the 

free market have been defeated in the short term by 

spontaneous creation of "black markets" (commerce in 

spite of governmental edicts to the contrary), and in the 

long term by replacement of the offending governments.  

During these lapses into anti-human experimentation 

(communism), the free market found itself in need of 

medium of exchange to replace the controlled and 

artificially-valued "state" currency.  Gold, foreign 

dollars, and even cigarettes were often-encountered 

substitutes for the goods they were used to represent in 

transactions.

	So what exactly is currency?  Well, its a 

particular representation (usually national) of money.  

And what is money?  Money is "short hand" for the effort 

which goes into producing goods and services.  Think of 

it this way:  You get paid $10 per hour for making 

shoehorns for Shoehorns Inc.  In one hour, you can 

produce 2 shoehorns, which Shoehorns Inc. can sell for 

$10 each.  

	This means several things:  First, Shoehorn Inc. 

will probably employ you forever, because you represent 

an excellent return on investment (100% per unit sold).  

This will go on until somebody like Cheaper Shoehorns 

Inc. starts selling shoehorns for $2 (because your 

counterpart in their company is based in Mexico making 

$3.50 per day) and runs Shoehorns Inc. out of business.

	Secondly (and most importantly), it means you have 

agreed to value one hour of your life at the amount of 

goods $10 can buy.  If you didn't accept this value, 

you'd find a higher-paying job.  It is also important to 

remember that this is not an exchange which can be 

undone.  You can't give Shoehorns Inc. $100 and have 

them credit your lifetime with 10 more hours.  It's a 

final, one-way exchange of their money for your life.  

With that money, you can buy bread, a car, maybe even 

a mortgage on a house.  Basically, it means the time you 

don't work is more enjoyable due to the goods and 

services you can acquire in exchange for the hours 

(represented by money) which you spend working.  But 

make no mistake, that money represents hours from your 

life.

	Now imagine a thief approaches you, and demands 

all your money, which is $400, because you just got paid 

for a 40 hours worth of shoehorn making.  Being a passive 

(and unarmed) soul, you comply.  That thief takes the 

result of one week of your life, and disappears.  He has 

added one week's worth of life to his experience (because 

he won't have to work), and taken one week's worth of 

life from yours.  This represents 25% of your monthly 

income which is now gone.  To get back to the standard 

of living you were enjoying before being robbed, you will 

now have to use up extra hours of your life-time making 

shoehorns (if Shoehorns Inc. allows overtime, that is).  

In fact, you may never have the option to make up the 

stolen value.  The thief has acted like a vampire, and 

stolen your life essence in order to enjoy it himself.  

This is fundamentally why theft is wrong.  It really 

represents graduated murder.

	This analogy currently applies to you.  "I've not 

been robbed!" you say.  "You have, but you don't know 

it" I respond.  For most Americans, the thief doesn't 

point the gun at you.  He doesn't even have the patience 

to wait until you receive your pay.  He actually robs you 

by taking part of your week's pay at the Shoehorns Inc. 

pay window before you even show up to collect it.  Who 

is this hoodlum who doesn't even trust you with your own 

money enough to steal it from you directly?  His name is 

Uncle Sam FICA (AKA the IRS, AKA Income Redistribution 

for Slaves).

	This is exactly the sort of taxation the Constitution 

prevented the Federal government from indulging in until 

the 16th Amendment was (dubiously) passed.  Direct taxes 

on sales, imports, property, etc. were the only allowable 

forms of direct taxation.  They were a face-to-face 

demand for a portion of the proceeds of endeavors which 

could not exist (or be guaranteed) without effort from 

the Federal government.  They were, in effect, exchanges 

of merchant money (life effort) for governmental services 

(legal, military, etc.) which made the making of that 

money dependable and secure.  In the original 

Constitutional system, tax money was collected and used 

only to support those areas of government which benefited 

those from whom the taxes were collected.  Taxation as a 

form of wealth redistribution (in the form of subsidies, 

welfare, etc.) was strictly illegal and acknowledged as 

immoral.

	This Constitutional, up-front and honest form of 

taxation was "augmented" by something new and hideously 

deceitful which not only attached itself to the individual 

act of working for a living (hardly something which the 

Federal government was designed to be involved with), but 

did so in a stealthy and parasitic fashion:  The income 

tax.  As if draining your life in preemptive secrecy 

wasn't bad enough, the percentage of other people's lives 

to which the Federal government deemed itself entitled 

has grown from its initial 5% on less than 1% of the 

population ("The rich" at whom it was supposedly aimed) 

in 1916, to at least 25% on close to 90% of the 

population today.

	Taking hours of your life (represented by 

dollars) before you even see them is a master stroke of 

inspiration (if your goal is to steal with subtlety and 

experience minimal resistance).  Think how many Americans 

would pay the income tax if they first received 100% of 

their wages, and then received an invoice stating "Please 

fill in your yearly income here: ______  Now please send 

at least 30% of your yearly income to the address 

below."  The entire state of Oregon would have to be 

cleared of trees just to supply enough paper for the 

mountains of "We have not received your payment" letters 

from the IRS....



			-- End --