It’s interesting to watch Congress acting indignant about the mess they created. This time it’s the Senate Finance Committee "investigating" the Internal Revenue Service. Some of the Senators actually act surprised at what they are hearing. That’s ridiculous! They’re doing little more than posturing for the cameras.

The cold hard fact is, all but maybe two Committee members are directly responsible for allowing the IRS to become a law unto itself. Most of them actually encouraged it over the years.

To the American public, the IRS epitomizes tyranny in America. And if we think about the problem for a while, this is understandable. For instance, in order for there to be something less than a feeling of tyranny in the taxation process, there must first be some sort of expectation in the law. That is, there must be an understandable rule of law which both tax collector and tax payer are expected to follow.

In The Road to Serfdom, Professor of Economics and Nobel laureate F. A. Hayek explains it thus: ". . . this means that government in all its actions is bound by rules fixed and announced beforehand -- rules which make it possible to foresee with fair certainty how the authority will use its coercive powers in given circumstances and to plan one’s individual affairs on the basis of this knowledge."

But our voluminous federal tax code is in a constant state of flux. Congress continually changes the tax law and the IRS continually changes the tax rules and regulations. Hence, there is no set rule of law to which American citizens may use to comply, or to plan their lives around. And as we will see, there are no basic rules of conduct to which IRS agents must conform.

In reality, we have a federal income tax code that is a mishmash of a few thousand pages of law supported by 15,000 more pages of regulations. And it would be impossible for taxpayers to know all this law, because it changes year to year.

In The Federalist Papers No. 62, James Madison admonishes: "It will be of little avail to the people that the laws are made by men of their own choice if the laws be so voluminous that they cannot be read, or so incoherent that they cannot be understood; if they be repealed or revised before they are promulgated, or undergo such incessant changes that no man, who knows what the law is today, can guess what it will be tomorrow. Law is defined to be a rule of action; but how can that be a rule, which is little known, and less fixed?"

Madison described our federal income tax code perfectly: Income tax laws are "so voluminous that they cannot be read." Tax laws are "so incoherent that they cannot be understood," even by the IRS. Tax laws are often "repealed or revised before they are promulgated." And federal income tax laws certainly "undergo such incessant changes that no man, who knows what the law is today, can guess what it will be tomorrow."

Why do we have ongoing acts of tyranny by the IRS? Simply because, when the volume of law enacted by government far exceeds the ability of the governed to comprehend, there is, in effect, no law. The unexpected consequence, then, is selective tyranny by the enforcers. And in this case it is brought about as a direct result of both the incompetence of Congress and the overzealous collection tactics of the unsupervised and unaccountable agents of the IRS.

Americans will label federal agents by their actions. An old rule of thumb in political science teaches that when you transform a crime ‘detecting’ agency into a crime ‘preventing’ policing apparatus, you have created a police state. In a dictatorship, or police state, government organizations spy on the citizens before they have been accused of committing a crime. In a free society, there must first be a reasonable suspicion that a citizen has committed a crime before the policing agency may inquire.

The IRS is little more than the tip of the iceberg; albeit the leader, in this program of bureaucratic tyranny. All federal agencies now operate as crime prevention agencies. American’s Constitutional rights to personal security, liberty and property -- those minimal concepts necessary for a free society to exist -- have long ago been sacrificed to the expediency of the federal bureaucracy. Congress has, in actuality, created for us something greatly different than a free society.

The Internal Revenue Service is plugged into nearly everything we do. That agency does not secretly spy on citizens like the BATF, the FBI and the spook agencies do. No, they are very out-front and blatant about it! The IRS just outwardly demands that taxpayers produce any and all information they want. It also demands that others, such as banks, employers, credit reporting agencies, auto dealers, etc., etc. also report all major citizen transactions to them. In addition, the IRS freely shares this information with other federal government organizations. In other words, the IRS historically displays zero respect for the American Rule of Law, and thus, for our United States Constitution.

The IRS’s outward contempt for our Constitution began years ago, when Congress decided that Constitutional protections -- such as our Fifth Amendment protection against self incrimination, and the Fourth Amendment mandate that government agents first obtain a search warrant before rifling through our private documents -- would not be required for that agency. Consequently, today’s IRS is able to do just about anything it wishes, including the taking of anything it wants.

IRS agents are paid well to inflict this unconstitutional tyranny on the American people. In fact, IRS agents collect merit pay increases, promotions and bonuses based on how much they collect, not on how much they legally collect. The agency also annually pays many millions of dollars in rewards to informants willing to spy on other citizens.

All this was perpetrated on the American public by Act of Congress -- by YOUR Members of Congress. Indeed, Congress could have corrected these problems years ago. Instead, they made them worse -- compounded the problems with wiretap, money transfer and forfeiture laws. So folks, you’ll have to excuse us if we confuse these Committee hearings with a bad parody skit coming from Comedy Central.

The only way this government can be fixed is by demanding that all public servants, in every agency of government, respect and honor all rights and liberties due all American citizens as per our United States Constitution. There can be no exceptions to that Rule of Law.

We applaud short, simple bills that are very easy to understand. And, every so often, we find a short bill which, if enacted into law, could bring a world of benefit to the American public. Below may be one such bill.

On September 17, 1997, Rep. Steve Largent (R-Okla.) introduced H.R. 2490 in the House of Representatives; a bill titled: "To terminate the Internal Revenue Code of 1986." This bill already has 11 co-sponsors, and is currently in the House Ways and Means Committee.

Below is the text of the bill, minus the headers. We suggest that you read the wording over carefully, and then take the time to discuss this matter with your Representative.

No tax shall be imposed by the Internal Revenue Code of 1986--

(1) for any taxable year beginning after December 31, 2001, and

(2) in the case of any tax not imposed on the basis of a taxable year, on any taxable event or for any period after December 31, 2001.

The Congress hereby declares that any new Federal tax system should be a simple and fair system that--

(1) applies a low rate to all Americans,

(2) requires a supermajority of both Houses of Congress to raise taxes,

(3) provides tax relief for working Americans,

(4) protects the rights of taxpayers and reduces tax collection abuses,

(5) eliminates the bias against savings and investment,

(6) promotes economic growth and job creation,

(7) does not penalize marriage or families, and

(8) protects the integrity of Social Security and Medicare.

At the time of this writing, the co-sponsors are: Rep. John Kasich (R-Ohio), Rep. Saxby Chambliss (R-Ga.), Rep. Michael Forbes (R-NY), Rep. Van Hilleary (R-Tenn.), Rep. Peter Hoekstra (R-Mich.), Rep. Walter B. Jones (R-NC), Rep. Don Manzullo (R-Ill.), Rep. Ron Packard (R-Calif.), Rep. Bill Redmond (R-NM), Rep. Mac Thornberry (R-TX), Rep. Zach Wamp (R-Tenn.).

A 50 year old woman took her 16 year old daughter to a sale at the local store last Saturday afternoon. Her three young sons also tagged along just for something to do. The shopping evidently went fine. It was when they tried to get home again that they were assaulted.

At the courthouse near the store, the woman saw a commotion in progress. Her young sons, as inquisitive boys will often do, started over to investigate. The mother called to the boys, and motioned for them to came back so they could all return home together. That’s when she was hit hard on the head. >From behind. By a horse.

Reports say that a horse assaulted the woman by using it’s head to bash the woman across the head. This caused blood to spew profusely, all over the woman’s clothing and the sidewalk. The 16 year old daughter, as can be expected, tried to help mama -- first by coming to her side, and then by attempting to protect her from the assaulting horse. That’s when the daughter got Maced, put face down on the sidewalk, and handcuffed.

Oh . . . We forgot to say that the horse was a police horse, with a cop on it. Sorry.

Anyway, the three young boys ran home to tell their father that mama was bleeding all over herself and their sister was arrested. Needless to say, the father was upset.

Papa comes on the scene and is greeted by a police officer. "You want some Mace?" an officer confronts him. He said he wanted his wife. The officer gave him the Mace anyway.

"Give me some more," the man yelled, by now understandably agitated. "I’m a good citizen; I respect the law, but I want my wife." That’s when he was arrested.

Mother and daughter went to jail. Mama was charged with assaulting a police horse, the daughter for failure to disperse and resisting arrest because she stopped to help mama. Papa was also charged with failure to disperse and resisting arrest. They all go to court next month.

This story sounds like an event typical to a third-world country, with a dictatorial police state, but it was not. This happened last weekend in Hamilton, Ohio. The commotion, according to press reports, was because 40 members of an Aryan Nations group scheduled a rally at the Butler County Courthouse. This attracted another 300 anti-Aryan protesters.

All in all, there were 18 misdemeanor arrests reported. None of them from the Aryan group.

And how did things get so far out of hand that shoppers were attacked and arrested as they exited stores? Easy. City Manager, Hal Shepherd, gives us a clear hint: The rally culminated "a horrible week" for local officials, he said. He added that he has not yet determined how much money the city and county spent to secure the rally site. However, we think those 400 police officers he rented from dozens of area departments must have cost taxpayers quite a few bucks.

Yes, that’s right! Four-hundred police officers were called to "protect" a small rally. All of them were on duty at once, and looking for something to do. And, as often happens lately in Southern Ohio, police overreacted and attacked someone uninvolved with the situation they were there to watch.

Free speech in Hamilton, Ohio is defiantly not free. Neither is liberty.

Last Friday they held a secret meeting. Oh sure, they called it an "executive session." But really, they were conducting the peoples’ business behind closed doors because they did not feel the American public could be trusted with the information being discussed.

After the meeting, Committee Chairman Fred Thompson had an announcement: The Democratic Party gets a break. The Committee will henceforth focus on fund- raising laws, rather than how the Democrats violated every fund-raising law on the books during the last election cycle.

In other words, just as things were moving right along with public disclosure of all the institutionalized lawlessness and corruption at the DNC and the Clinton, Clinton & Gore Campaign Committee, they stopped. Just as America was starting to realize exactly how corrupt this administration really is, the Thompson Committee changed the subject.

One thing the Thompson Committee learned during their secret executive session was that the FBI had information all along that proved a major contributor to the Democratic Party and the Clinton, Clinton & Gore campaign did, in fact, use Communist Chinese government funds with the intention of buying influence. The FBI said that they "misplaced" the information for a couple years. Anyone believe that? Meanwhile, the Commie agent went right along buying influence for the Communist Chinese government. And, judging by the results, he (and others) did a pretty good job of it -- the administration was bending over backwards to make sure the Red Chinese got everything they wanted from us.

Apparently the FBI made zero arrests in the case. Obviously, the FBI did not think this important enough for a full scale investigation, either. Nor was anyone called before the Thompson Committee to explain. There are probably too many big name politicians involved in this deal to risk the public learning of it. Therefore, the information is another "non-news" event for the national media.

Really, if we didn’t know better (and we don’t), this smells like a major espionage set up! First, the Commies spread a little dirty money around in Congress -- that’s easy cause the money grabbers in Congress will take money from anyone. That done, the Red Chinese agents give the big bucks where it will do the most good for Communist China: The Clinton and Gore Reelection Campaign Committee and its sub-committee, the Democratic National Committee.

Think about it. Anyone in Congress making a big stink about Clinton taking the illegal Red Chinese money will quickly be told to shut up by the many Members of Congress who also got some.

So, what have we got here? We know that the Communist Chinese government has been funneling money to Members of Congress for a few years. Some in Congress even gave part of it back this year. Then, this new twist pops up -- a major Democratic Party contributor with proven ties to the Communist Chinese Government money. Worse, the FBI and the spook agencies knew all about this Chinese government operation but conveniently sat on the information for at least three years. And, also conveniently, Clinton (and the DNC) benefited with a few millions bucks in "donations" from the Communists.

That’s just what we know about right now. But stay tuned; the story is just now breaking. Which means, folks, there is a lot more to come!

Clinton wants the Committee to "study" campaign finance legislation. No surprise there. Clinton would want anything to get Congress to stop investigating his campaign finances. Congress, of course, now wants to debate the McCain-Feingold bill. No doubt the administration applied a bit of pressure to quite a few in Congress in order to get that concession. What we should be asking is two-fold: What pressure was applied? And why did Members of Congress care what the administration wanted? That’s where the real story is.

Meanwhile, of those many dialing for dollars telephone calls made from the White House, Clinton says publicly that, "I am absolutely certain that we believed that we were acting within the letter of the law." No he didn’t. That’s an outright lie! There’s proof, too.

First, there’s a memo from Abner Mikva, Clinton’s own White House attorney, telling everyone that it is against the law to dial for dollars from any government property. Second, when presented with a memo saying that the Campaign Committees may be fined upwards to a couple million dollars for the illegal fund-raising actions they had planned, and they need to put this fine money aside, Clinton approved it. That’s right! They all knew that at least some of these illegal activities would be discovered after the election. Therefore, Clinton endorsed putting aside a pile of campaign money with which to pay the penalties.

So, what was said at the Thompson Committee’s secret executive session? Probably that this line of questioning must end because it is very close to becoming a national security problem. As the Democrats are so fond of saying, "everyone does it." If Clinton and Gore are accused, then so must many Members of Congress. We have no idea how many in Congress are involved, but we would bet that there are quite a few. And we know that they will not go quietly.

Where does the national security angle come in? Cause trouble for these life-tenured lords and ladies of Congress and they will start talking about Israel, Japan, Hong Kong, Taiwan, and a few other countries buying influence for years on end with nothing said. That money is every bit as illegal as what China contributed. And with a wink and a nod, most of Congress was (is) involved.

It happened just after the 12:30 break on Friday September 26, 1997, while the largest audience in broadcast history was listening. The subject was the IRS, federal regulations, bureaucratic tyranny and the unconstitutional activities of the federal agencies.

Rush Limbaugh put both his formidable girth and his fortune on the line by daring to discuss, on the air, a conversation he had concerning the tyranny of the IRS with House Majority Leader Dick Armey (R-TX) that same morning.

Rush candidly reported that when he questioned Armey about tax law, Armey said that the law was historically left intentionally vague and open-ended by Democrats to allow more power to the IRS. In other words, the IRS then interprets the tax law the way the IRS wants it. And, that "interpretation" is often done almost on a case by case basis.

In other words, folks, we are not to know what the law is. In fact, the income tax law is whatever the IRS says the income tax law is at the moment. They make up the incidentals of the law as they go along.

As a correction, Rep. Armey wants to scrap the system -- the whole of the tax code, the IRS, and all regulations. Rush announced that, in support of abolishing the current tax code and the IRS, Armey and others will soon begin a speaking tour around the country.

Meanwhile, we learn that even Members of Congress fear the power of the IRS. It’s no wonder, either. As IRS agents indicated to the Senate Finance Committee this week, the IRS will stop at nothing to get its way -- even to the point of intimidating jurors in tax cases.

Will Rush get audited for speaking up? Will the IRS attach the Golden EIB Microphone? We don’t know. But the way things are going with the Clinton administration, we would feel confident to bet a few bucks that Rush’s accountants are already spending time in the IRS office -- or, if not now, they will be shortly.

Thank you, Rush, for joining the fight towards a more Constitutional form of government. Your public support on this issue will go far in stimulating the silent majority into taking action. And if that happens, we may yet have that government intended by the Founding Fathers.

-- End --