The Myth of Republican Conservatism

“The Ugly Truth About the
Republican Party:
The Myth of GOP Conservatism
by Kevin Tuma


"An elective despotism was not the
government we fought for."
--Thomas Jefferson

"Degrees do not matter...
one does not bargain about inches of evil."
---Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged

As a paleoconservative, I find myself these days looking back at the Clinton Administration with a sort of warm, golden nostalgia. Much has changed since those days...and not for the better.
To anyone with even a basic understanding and respect for the Bill of Rights, the United States, since September 11, 2001, has begun a nightmarish descent. To put it simply, the Bush White House has put the Constitution on the chopping block in ways the Clintons would have never dared to attempt.

The US public---naive and obedient as always--blithely sucked up the maudlin flag-waving and crocodile tears that accompanied the passage of the Patriot Act and the Office of Homeland Security. Authorities can now invade homes without warrants, arrest people without charges, and jail people without trials.

The Feds have declared Posse Comitatus obsolete, and they are creating hordes of military police to be unleashed upon the country. A new branch of the military is now on the drawing board, to deal with "domestic threats"--i.e., common American citizens. Despite the fact that we are not at war, the government continues to hold hundreds of military prisoners in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and apparently will deal with them using military tribunals. People in the Press continue their ongoing demonstration that there's no lie the Federal government can tell that they are willing to expose, and no usurpation of power that they will ever find objectionable. Even the United States' 'shadow government' has been openly discussed--and no one dares to criticize the concept. Orwellian newspeak abounds.

The government continues to turn the word Treason on its head with its unconstitutional treatment of the public and its illicit treatment of 'enemy combatants' like Yaser Esam Hamdi and Jose Padilla. In the latter case, the 'terrorist' is an American citizen being held without any charges, denied all legal representation, denied the right to defend himself, and the right to face his accusers. No one in the Imperial Media cares. Machiavellian plotting to establish armies of secret police and citizen informants goes on unabated, despite the fact that these measures did not pass Congress. The small public outcry generated by the TIPS plan is swept aside...a citizen informant system will be implemented anyway. Why? Because the Attorney General says so. Apparently, Mr. Ashcroft learned a very valuable lesson from his predecessor, Janet Reno: The Attorney General is--absolutely and without question---above the Law, and is capable of creating policy by fiat, just like the President does. We now have a modern triumvirate of entities that create policy, and answer to no one: the Supreme Court, the President, and the Attorney General of the United States. All Americans are subservient to their whims.

The abuse of liberties in the name of safety goes on. The government continues to push for National ID cards and a computer chip implant tracking program for children--it would appear that human privacy is just as irrelevant now as human liberty. Only human 'safety' is important, even if it's the safety of the gulag. The New York Times published an article suggesting that the Feds have built concentration camps within the United States...there was no real denial from the Executive Branch. Media talking heads have actually asked citizens if they think torture of 'terrorist suspects' is a good idea--as if to suggest that favorable public opinion would legitimize such tactics. In the War On Terror, no potential abuse of civil liberties goes unconsidered. One gets the queasy feeling that once official Washington has finished off what is left of the Constitution, they will revive the Inquisition and go after the Magna Carta next.

It is time for a realistic assessment: We are living in a Police State right now. Not six months from now. Not ten years down the road. Not if someone we do not like gets elected President. Not if all our guns are taken away.

Right now.

The only reason you are reading this article here is because they haven't started censoring political dissent on the Internet...yet. There are many evils that have not been implemented to date, but the mechanical apparatus of totalitarianism is completely in place, oiled, idling, and ready for use, thanks to the War On Terror.

America was fascistic and centralized before, but not nearly this bad. American citizens at least had some legal protections against government abuse in the past, and some means to keep an eye on the Feds--these have been essentially stripped away. The Independent Counsel Act is dead, thereby making it much harder to investigate the Executive Branch. The FBI is rewriting its own rulebook to make Federal whistleblowing a dangerous and difficult thing to do. The Freedom of Information Act has essentially been nullified-to protect our "national security".

The Fourth Amendment is effectively dead until the USA-Patriot Act is repealed, or until it is declared unconstitutional by a high court. The Patriot Act's deadly provisions do not sunset, despite government misinformation to the contrary. Most of the other nine amendments of the Bill of Rights have been ignored for years. They will certainly be ignored now that the Federal government has voted itself unlimited power and control over our domestic liberties in the name of security. Meanwhile, we are inches away from full-blown Martial Law, and in constant danger that it will be put into effect at the slightest new terrorist provocation.

Unfortunately, these changes are pretty much unknown to the typical indolent, unfocused US citizen. While the average American was lazing around, stuffing his face with potato chips, and watching "Big Brother" on TV, the Federal Government became Big Brother in real life. Sadly, it requires effort---like reading and thinking---to see that our liberties are being threatened from within; this is apparently beyond the scope of most modern Americans. Of course, another reason why there has been little outcry is because there has been very little information disseminated by the official state propaganda corps we once euphemistically called "the Free Press".

The biggest problem, however, is not the fat, lazy American or the many goose-stepping little Goebbels of our news media--the big problem is that these changes have been wrought by a Republican President who was elected by millions of gullible conservatives. There is no "lesser of two evils" or philosophical core to the Republican Party, and the inarticulate Mr. Bush is proof of that pudding. The massive abrogations of freedom that have come from Washington since 9-11-01 are an official product of Republican governance. They cannot be blamed on Bill Clinton or Al Gore or Tom Daschle.

The GOP has been wholly in charge of post-War-On-Terror Washington, and is fully responsible for the unconstitutional policies that have been enacted. These are oppressive government policies that--if implemented in the 1990s, under Clinton and Reno, would have provoked screams of outrage. The mavens of talk radio are now silent about civil liberties, and seem only interested in discussing the joyful topic of going to war in the Mideast again, and killing more fleeing Iraqi soldiers. There are no philosophical principles behind the policies of the Bush Republicans; they simply want to seize as much Federal power as possible, and make war. The 21st Century conservative movement is not just an intellectual wasteland..it has become a primary threat to our freedoms as well.

However, the real reason the Republican Party is a threat to liberty is not because conservatism itself is an errant philosophy. The reason is because the Republican Party never stood for conservative values in the first place, and is lying to the public whenever it attempts to co-opt the values of conservatism. Ronald Reagan and Barry Goldwater were never the standard bearers, or the rule. They were the exceptions to the rule, at least when they were at their best, and were not being manipulated by empire builders themselves. The real Republican Party is and always has been an arrogant political body, dominated by snobs and big business people who are more interested in Robber Baronism than honest capitalism. They have always been ready and willing to use Big Government to enforce their schemes, to hand out corporate welfare to them, and to protect their investments--particularly in the case of petroleum. The Republican establishment backs the Federal Reserve, the IRS, and other unconstitutional agencies while giving shifty-eyed lip service to the concept of small government and lower taxes. Such people have no populism in their soul, and no concern for the constitutional rights of the little people--and they couldn't possibly care less about the size, scope, and intrusiveness of the government. Snotty corporate monopolist wannabes and closet socialists are the true heart and soul of the GOP…not the poor, misled middle-class voters who believe "that government is best which governs least".

That is not to suggest that the Democrats are any better. They aren't; their party is a massive fraud as well. But they are also not any worse. Those voters who mistakenly thought they were worse are responsible for voting Bush into office, and thereby destroying the 4th Amendment. This abrogation of human liberty probably never would have happened under Gore, had there been a President Gore, because talk radio and the FOX News Channel would have provided large-scale political dissent that we do not have today. Unfortunately, the GOP masses have proven beyond any shadow of a doubt that they are every bit as much a bunch of partisan lemmings as the Clintonistas were. And they have also disproven--with their popular President, who is treated with kid gloves--their own long-held contention that the elitist news media is liberal. On the contrary. The elitist news media is a whore, dancing to the tune of those with power and influence--and if it is firmly anything at all, it is firmly Anti-Liberty and Pro-Big-Government. How fortunate for the Bushies that their beloved "President 911" stands for exactly the same things.

The word 'conservative' implies preservations of values and important traditions. In America, our most important traditions would be embodied in the Bill of Rights and the Declaration of Independence. By this standard, the most conservative Americans around today are libertarians, not Republicans. However, very few libertarians today would willingly claim the word 'conservative'..and I can hardly blame them.

What is called 'conservative' today is warmongering 20th Century statism drummed to a flag-waving beat. The common diatribe used by liberals--that 'Republicans are still living in the 1950s'--is incorrect; they are actually living in the 1940s, instead. It is very telling, for example, that Rush Limbaugh is a huge fan of the Spielberg film "Saving Private Ryan", and had nothing but praise for Tom Brokaw's book "The Greatest Generation". How apropos that Limbaugh calls himself the "Doctor of Democracy". If Republicans pine for the histrionic days of World War II, they are nationalists--not conservatives. They are longing for the nostalgic trappings of Franklin Delano Roosevelt's world, not a conservative culture. FDR was both a Communist and a liar, but, additionally, he was also a very effective warmonger and militarist. War, apparently, is very important to the Republicans--they do not worry much about little things like rights or liberties; they want to be fantasy heroes with a gun, like Rambo or Dirty Harry. The star-spangled cloak that self-proclaimed conservatives like Rush and Hannity and O'Reilly and Kristol wrap themselves in is a fabric of big-government nationalism and military expansionism. If boot-stomping nationalism is all conservatism really stands for, the warmed-over '60s peacenik academics who have called Hitler a 'right-winger' are correct.

The true spiritual father of the Republican Party is not Goldwater, or Reagan, but Abraham Lincoln. Some people might misinterpret this as a compliment. I refer to the real Abraham Lincoln. The same Lincoln who suspended the writ of Habeas Corpus, and the same Lincoln who used a noble human idea---the freeing of the slaves-to wage a greedy war of aggression on a separate and sovereign nation, and to grind its culture and people into the ground. The same Abraham Lincoln who ordered the arrest and imprisonment of newspaper editors and publishers who disagreed with his war, and ordered Federal troops to demolish their printing presses. The same "Honest Abe" who ordered troops to interfere with the election process in opposition Congressional districts, and who ordered the arrest and imprisonment of several dozen state legislators. The same brooding tyrant who went on to order the military arrest of a sitting member of Congress who was a war opponent, and then have him deported from the United States.

Abraham Lincoln was the ultimate Federalist and the ultimate propagator of War. He was the summation and the embodiment of the essence of Republicanism. There is nothing new about this; it is how things have always been. Republicans in authority have almost always kowtowed to corrupt business interests and marched the US to war for greedy causes, just like Lincoln did. Any list of historically prominent GOP leaders is predominantly a list of globalists and elitists who have believed in a strong, centralized government. There is no grand and glorious history of GOP conservatism...GOP conservatism is a sham. They are not capitalists or constitutionalists; they are statists.

And that is the ugly, untold truth of the Republican Party.

http://www.libertyforall.net/2002/archive/sept29/ugly-truth.html”

“Hmmmmm,.....not too flattering, but interesting.”

“Why is this thus? What is the meaning of this thusness?

--Artemus Ward (Charles Farrar Browne)”

“'Cause I look different,
You think I'm subversive!
Crazy for the blue white and red...”

“The afternoon crowd has to read this.”

“Back to the top!”

“what does summation mean?”

“-”

“Yet another cut-and-paste diatribe. How interesting...and unique!








yawn...”

“There is truth-a small amount-
I hope I do not feed a troll-or a Socialist...”

“"always kowtowed to corrupt business interests and marched the US to war for greedy causes, just like Lincoln did. Any list of historically prominent GOP leaders is predominantly a list of globalists and elitists who have believed in a strong, centralized government"

BS ranting”

“''How to be a right wing pundit in 12 easy lessons''
Printed on Sunday, July 07, 2002 @ 01:02:42 EDT ( )

By Matt Osborne
YellowTimes.org Columnist (United States)

(YellowTimes.org) – Anxious to stand on the "right" side of all televised debate? Sure, why not? After all, it's fun - and profitable! Right wing pundits (RWPs) like Ann Coulter get on all the cable channels, plugging their books to earn fame and fortune. Why not you, too?

In the interests of "equal time," YellowTimes.org has assembled the following proven method for attaining success as an RWP. We've examined the quotes, careers, and missteps of the Radical Right and distilled them into these easy-to-remember rules:

1.) Claim the moral high ground - and remember, it's the ONLY high ground!

This is important: whatever you decree as The Correct Belief, it must always rest on the bedrock authority of the RWP's "Holy Trinity": God, the Flag, and the Founding Fathers. Everyone who disagrees is a Satanic flag-burning communist troll bent on America's destruction.

You can't let things get murky! They always have to be simple - tell America "this is the way God and the Founding Fathers intended us to run America." There is no other way, after all, because any other way is, well, just wrong.

Say that the president is a wise leader, even when he shoots himself in the foot. And always claim that America is good, wise, and moral, even when American bombs destroy Afghan weddings.

2.) Tell everyone you're in favor of families and "family values."

Of course, almost everyone is in favor of these things - but only the Right Wing knows what's best for them! And "family" is the RWP's patented formula for success, because it spins every part of your agenda into a coherent whole.

In lean times like these, we can't expect Americans to simultaneously accept agriculture subsidies for corporations, tuition vouchers for creation "science" education, AND more free-trade agreements unless these things are all "good for American families."

3.) Don't ever define "family values."

Let's face it, when a family of two laid-off adults has no health insurance for their kids, they will "value" some kind of government assistance. But RWPs promote the idea of self-sufficiency, so you can't have that. It might teach their children the wrong lesson - that government is good for something besides giving rich companies tax breaks.

"Family values" has nothing to do with the actual well-being of any family, but we can't say that out loud - so it's best to avoid the question.

4.) Government is a four-letter word! Say it with contempt.

Government is big, and it takes away your money. This is why people don't like it. By constantly reminding them of this, you can cut any program you dislike in order to "make government smaller."

But note this: the Right Wing can actually expand the government any way it wishes - for instance, starting up a whole new cabinet department without Congressional oversight - so long as "it's good for America."

It can even cut those "unnecessary" programs (education, the environment, and so forth) and use the money for things that are "good for America": drilling oil in Alaska, building extra bombers in someone's home district, etc.

5.) Always claim victim status.

The media is liberal, the courts are liberal, and the education system is liberal. Above all, the Congress - and every state legislature - is somehow controlled by "the liberals," even when the GOP is the majority and most federal judges were appointed by Republicans.

They are all "the Establishment." That's right! In order to succeed, you must scream bias and discrimination at every turn - like a white, Protestant version of Nat X yelling about "the Man always trying to bring me down."

And always claim that the majority of Americans are behind you, even though you always claim to be the put-upon minority.

6.) Attack other victims.

Remember: it's the Palestinians' fault when Israel invades their land and builds settlements. If they weren't so backward, uncivilized, and Muslim, then they could work for peanuts in Israeli kibbutzes and shop at Wal-Mart like civilized people.

And American minorities, especially Blacks, are to blame for being enslaved, ghettoized, discriminated against, and sodomized with nightsticks. If they weren't so darned Black, after all, they'd be just like us White folks.

7.) Call everything "spin."

When a pundit outside the Right Wing has a point, you must immediately denounce it as "spin." This is the magic word! It demeans their honesty and deflects attention away from the primary issue. It also makes the right wing viewer cheer and buy your book, because you're so "penetrating" and "honest."

If you are caught saying something dishonest, stupid, or plain wrong, you must immediately repair the damage on Fox News Channel. Go on any program there - they're all the same, just different anchors - and call the host of the show you got creamed on a "spinning liberal." This always works.

8.) Spin everything.

Turn every event to your agenda. When terrorists attack, blame it on Al Gore instead of American foreign policy. When kids shoot their classmates, blame it on media violence instead of easy access to weapons.

Whatever happens is obviously THEIR fault, because THEY are to blame. WE did not create these problems, because WE are always right. Right?

Moreover, you should always take the opportunity to label your own spin as the truth. Estate taxes are "death taxes" because that's what they are. If anyone points out that the tax is paid by the inheritor, who has done nothing to earn his fortune or to pay for the national defense that protects his new wealth, see #7.

9.) Throw a book together and lecture on Fox about the horrible state of liberal media spin.

Don't worry about facts. Those can be manufactured for you by careful statistical analysis of media. For example, it's always possible to point out that TV and newspapers identify "conservatives" more often than liberals.

Conservative publications like the Washington Times are also guilty of this; but we can put a spin on that: "it simply proves how epidemic this tendency is."

Ignore the fact that liberals rarely identify themselves with the label, or that the "conservative" label is the Nehru jacket of the Right Wing. When you write your book - or pay a staff to write it for you - such insights are not helpful. They confuse and bore the Right Wing Consumer.

10.) Call yourself a "conservative."

The Right Wing Consumer's fear of inadequacy needs the calming reassurance of moral rectitude. But never, ever define the word unless forced to, in which case you must call upon those "values" and "family" words and "founding fathers."

After all, if RWPs admitted to their own propensity for elitism and mistrust of democracy, we would look like very scary Radicals instead of mild-mannered "Conservatives."

As long as you remember to back up the Right Wing agenda with goodness, mom and apple pie, you will always overcome the facts.

11.) Remember your economic buzzwords!

Chant "Free Enterprise," "Market Economy," " Capitalism," and "Privatization." It's your proven method for turning those massive corporate welfare programs, special tax breaks, and assaults on the common environment into things that are "good for America." Who's against "free," "market," and "private"?

If properly manipulated, government regulations can crush any entrepreneurial upstarts who might compete with the corporate benefactors of your favorite political party - and allow those same benefactors to hide their assets, debts, and toxic spills.

The difference is in the spin. We "let business and government work together for America" or "let the free market determine the winner" - and our friends in Washington rake in the dough.

12.) States' rights are only the Rights'!

When a state "fights" to prevent the legal sale of vibrators, or gay sex, marriage, and adoption, it's time to talk about "states' rights." But when states allow medical marijuana use, physician-assisted suicide, or any other part of the "liberal" agenda, the states have no rights. The only 'rights' states should have is the Right's rights!

Well, there you have it. Now, go get on TV! Prove your credentials as a RWP, and watch the money - and fame - rolling in!

[Matt Osborne has served eight years in the U.S. military and holds a Bachelor Arts degree in Political Science. He speaks Arabic and Southern as well as English. Matt enjoys running in triathlons, and has a large family living in the shadow of Helen Keller's Alabama home, located in the southern United States.]”

“More wit and wisdom cut and pasted by Bob Woodward in Sacramento.”

“When I lived in California, we called it 'Excremento'...”

“Ha! That's a good one Mr. Goose!”

“Nah, 'Mr. Goose' was my daddy. I'm 'Father Goose'.”

“Do you have a link for that one, Rosey? Thanks.”

“Just rec'd an email this AM that seems pertinent:> The Difference Between The Liberal and Conservative "Debate" Over The
War On Terrorism:

Question: You're walking down a deserted street with your wife and two small children. Suddenly, a dangerous looking man with a huge knife comes around the corner and is running at you while screaming obscenities. In your hand is a .357 Magnum and you are an
expert shot. You have mere
seconds before he reaches you and your family. What do you do?

Liberal Answer: Well that's not enough information to answer the question! Does the man look poor or oppressed? Have I ever done anying to him that's inspiring him to attack? Could we run away?
What does my wife think? What about the kids? Could I possibly swing the gun like a club and
knock the knife out of his hand? What does the law say about this
situation? Is it possible he'd be
happy with just killing me? Does he definitely want to kill me or would he just be content to wound
me? If I were to grab his knees and hold on, could my family get away while he was stabbing me?
This is all so confusing! I need to debate this with some friends for a few days to try to come to a
conclusion...

Conservative Answer:
Just Shoot him.”

“Does one shoot him(your fantasy man) liberally-just blow it all-or consevratively-waste not, want not.”

“Liberal Question:

What were you doing in that neighborhood? Buying crack?”

“www.boortz.com Updated 8/1/02


THE DEMOCRATS' (SECRET) PLAN FOR AMERICA
The Democrats have begun their campaign to frighten voters before the fall elections. It's nothing but a replay of past elections, the only difference being that they seem to be starting the scare tactics a bit early this year. I guess you can't blame them. Nothing else has worked. The tried to hand the Florida election problems on Bush. No go. Then it was the economy, and that didn't work either. They gave a stab at the "Bush is stupid" routine, but Americans aren't buying it. Enron looked worse for Clinton than it did for Republicans, so the Social Democrats had to give up on that one too. So, it's time to go back to Democratic roots. Try to scare the beejezus out of older voters. It's worked in the past -- so it will surely work this time.

The ploy is simple. Convince wrinkled citizens that the evil Republicans want to take away their Social Security. It’s an old trick, tried and true. The Democrats roll this one out every single election. This time the point men are Richard Gephardt and Terry McAuliffe. They're both telling voters that the evil Republicans have a "secret" plan to reduce Social Security benefits as soon as they are reelected.

So .. now that the Democrats have opened this whole “secret plan” idea – what about the secret plans of the Democratic Socialists? Just what legislative agenda does the Democrat Party plan to pursue if and when they gain control of the Senate, the House and the presidency? Here are just some of the goodies the Social Democrat Party has in store for the people of America.

Remove a majority of voters from responsibility for income taxes
This is the biggie – and they’ve made no attempt to hide their goals here. The Democrats have been working on this plan for decades --- with no small amount of help from the cowardly Republicans. The idea is simple. Using “refundable” tax credits and deductions and such ideas as the fraudulent Earned Income Tax Credit the Democrats are working to shift the entire burden for the payment of federal income taxes onto a minority of US taxpayers. Right now the top 50 percent of taxpayers pay almost 96 percent of the taxes. The Democrats are close to their goal. When the majority of voters have no federal income tax liability it will be almost impossible to pass any meaningful tax cuts – and further tax increases will be a piece of cake, especially if the taxes only affect those to be considered to be rich. Through this ploy the Democrats plan to create a defeat-proof socialist congress.

Shift Social Security and Medicare Taxes to the "Rich"
Payroll taxes, as you know, are basically Social Security and Medicare taxes. The Democrats have almost achieved their goal of shielding the so-called "poor" from any income tax liability at all. But --- the poor saps still have to pay Social Security and Medicare taxes. Democrats conveniently ignore the fact that these same people will get full Social Security and Medicare benefits when they reach the magic age ... and those benefits must never be touched! It's OK, though, to excuse these people from the responsibility of actually having to pay the premiums for these insurance and retirement benefits. So ..... the next element of the Democrats' Secret Plan! The elimination of payroll taxes for the poor!

This is a plan that was put forth by Democrat Robert Reich on the Cutie-Pie and Holmes show on Fox News Channel on July 31, 2002. The idea is to, as Reich puts it, "lift the tax burden off the poor" by eliminating payroll taxes on the first $15,000 of income. Here's how you do it. The Democrats pass a law which says that nobody has to pay any payroll taxes on the first $15,000 of their income. Bingo -- the poor now have a completely free ride! They are now life-long, dedicated Democratic voters. But wait! Isn't that going to cost the government money? Are you kidding? Of course it's not! It's not going to cost the government money because they're simply going to raise the salary cap for Social Security taxes by enough to cover the lost revenues! Right now the cap is around $88,000 on Social Security taxes. To cover the shortfall Reich says they will just raise the salary cap by $15,000 ... to $103,000 a hear. Reich forgets, though, that there is no cap on Medicare taxes, so raising the cap by $15,000 would not recover the Medicare taxes lost by excluding the first $15,000 in income. In reality the Democrats would have to raise the salary cap by about $19,000. They would just round it off to $20,000.

So, there you go. Shifting the burden for the cost of Social Security and Medicare for low income earners onto high income earners. The Democratic way.

Massive increase in Social Security taxes
As we’ve said, Social Security is a mainstay when it comes to Democrat vote-buying. Social Security was, is and always will be nothing more than a giant income redistribution scheme designed to create dependency on government and loyalty to the program’s protectors in congress. The more money you pour into Social Security benefits, the more the wizened class loves you, depends on you and will be dedicated to keeping you in office. The Democrats need massive new funding sources to pay expanded Social Security benefits --- but they must get that money without raising Social Security taxes on the middle and lower income groups. The solution? The Democrats have a “secret plan” to expand the wage base for Social Security taxes. Right now you only pay these taxes on the first $88,000 or so of income. Give the Democrats the power and watch that wage base jump to $100,000, $200,000 and beyond. The eventual Democrat Party goal is to have people pay Social Security taxes on every penny they earn … no matter how much that is. There will no comparable increase in benefits for the high income earners. The extra money will be used to keep the Democratic middle and low-income constituency happy.

End the home mortgage interest deduction

Democrats have been after this income tax deduction for decades. They call it a "subsidy." Now the more intelligent among us will clearly understand that allowing someone to keep more of the money that they earn can hardly be called a "subsidy." But we're talking about the more intelligent among us. These people aren't likely to be voting for Democrats anyway!

As soon as the Democrats manage to gain control of the federal government they will move to eliminate this "subsidy for the rich." They know that there will be little adverse political fallout. After all -- the mortgage interest deduction is only valuable to people who actually pay income taxes AND who itemize their deductions. Democrats have already succeeded in removing most of their core constituency from the income tax rolls --- so what is there to lose?

When the Democrats ride into power you had better be prepared to kiss that mortgage interest deduction -- and a lot more of your money -- a fond farewell.

Socialized Medicine
They already tried this will Hillary Care. It failed. Democrats aren’t discouraged by failure. They just try and try again until they finally get you to swallow the poison pill. There are two basic reasons the Democrats are working so hard for complete government control of this huge segment of our economy. One, of course, is power. Health care comprises about 15% of our national economy. If the government can seize control of this large a segment of our economy a giant step toward a socialist economy will have been achieved. The second reason is control. Think about it. If you control a person’s access to healthcare … you effectively control that person.

Right now the Democrats have had to put their plans for socialized medicine on hold. Those pesky Republicans in the House and the White House are making things tough. Democrats have to be satisfied with just sitting up there in the Beltway blocking any efforts to introduce competition into the medical marketplace.

Democrats live in quaking fear of free market competition. This was one of the reasons they worked so hard to defeat Bush’s economic stimulus plan. There was a provision in that plan that would allow laid-off workers to go out into the marketplace to find health insurance. They would then be allowed a tax credit to cover the cost of that health insurance premium. Democrats wanted federal funds to be paid to employers to encourage employers to extend health insurance benefits to laid-off workers. Democrats knew that if private individuals ventured into the free marketplace to find health insurance they might just find that free market competition could deliver a superior insurance product at a reduced price.

Tax your pension funds
This idea first received serious consideration in the early Clintonista years. As soon as the Republicans took control of the Congress the idea disappeared. Right now it’s being “secretly” incubated by Democrats to be hatched when they regain control. The idea is simple. There are trillions of dollars out there in various private pension and 401K plans. All of these trillions of dollars are earning interest for (gasp!) private investors and individuals and not for the government! To make matters worse – most of these private pension and 401K plans are owned by the evil, hated upper income earners.

The “secret” plan? A one-time 15% tax on the outstanding balance of all private pension and 401K retirement plans. This money would be paid into the general fund of the federal government and used to fund various social programs for low and middle-income earners.

Is this a dangerous plan for Democrats? Not really. The plan would take money chiefly from those who earn enough money to actually pay income taxes and contribute to pension plans. These people do not make up the core of Democratic voters.

Tax your pension contributions also
After the Democrats levy their 15% tax on the outstanding balance of all pension and 401K plans, they intend to follow up with a tax on all future contributions to these plans. The theory is that “rich” people shouldn’t be allowed to contribute that money to these plans tax free when “poor” people don’t have that opportunity.

The Magic of Imputed Income
Imputed? What does "imputed" mean?

One definition is to “credit.” So, by imputed income, we mean that you are credited with income you didn’t necessarily earn.

The goal is clear. Democrats want to milk the high-achievers for as much money as they possibly can. There are really only two ways Democrats can get more income tax out of you. One way is to raise the tax rates. At some point this is going to prove to be politically risky. So, how else can they bleed you for more? Even Democrats who have been to government schools can do simple math. They know they can get more money out of you if that line on your income tax return that reads “taxable income” can be increased. Forty percent of $120,000 is more than 40% of $90,000. All you have to do is impute – credit – more income to the poor taxpaying high-achiever.

So --- here is the idea that the Clinton Administration was tossing around prior to the voter revolution of 1994. They were going to impute – credit – extra income to people who own their own homes. This was going to be done for two reasons. First, to push more people into the higher income brackets where Clinton tax increases could reach them. Second, to increase the amount of taxes actually collected from these people. Here’s how Clinton's imputed income scheme was going to work:

Let’s say you own a home worth $250,000. Your payments on that home are about $2,000 a month. The government uses census data (there is a reason they ask all of those extra questions) to figure out what a $250,000 home in your neighborhood would rent for. Let’s say it would rent for $3000 a month. This means that you could rent your home for $1000 a month more than your payments. But you're not renting your home, you’re living in it. You must know that this just isn’t fair to people who have to rent homes. They don’t get the tax deductions you get. They don’t own their own homes because, unlike you, they haven’t, as Dickie Gephardt likes to phrase it, “won life’s lottery.”

Well .. since you're so rich and since you own your own home, the Democrats would really like to get a little more money from you to spend on those poor renters and people who aren’t as “fortunate” as you are. This would all be in exchange of their votes, of course.

So … here is this element of the Democrats' secret plan for you and your bank account. When you fill out your tax return you will have to consult certain tables and government data to determine what a home like yours would rent for in your neighborhood. Using the example above, your home would rent for $3000. You’re paying $2000 a month to your mortgage company. You will be instructed to take the difference ($1000 a month) and multiply it by 12. This gives you $12,000. That’s your imputed income. Add that to your other earnings to come up with your taxable income. That adds up to more than $4,500 in additional income taxes if you're in the top tax bracket. Hey, it's only fair ... you being rich and all.

Don’t gripe. This is all for those needed government programs for the “less fortunate.”

By the way --- you should know that there is an imputed income bill in the Congress. It’s about child support, not home mortgages. If you’re a deadbeat dad who owes back child support you would, under this law, have to add the amount of your arrearage to your taxable income and pay taxes on it. Fact is, you’ve already paid taxes on this income once. The bill would just punish you for not forking it over to the ex wife by making you pay tax on it a second time. Today, child support. Tomorrow, that money you could be making if you would only rent your home instead of live in it.

Economically Targeted Investments -- controlling your pension fund investments.

Here we are, right back at your pension funds and 401K funds again. Again --- there is so much money in these funds, trillions of dollars, that the Democrats just can't leave them alone. All of this money just sitting there and not one penny of it is being used to buy votes for Democrats. So --- here comes the idea of Economically Targeted Investments. "ETIs" the Democrats call them, and they're a huge part of the Democrat "secret" agenda. All they need is control in Washington.

Here's the deal. The government grants various tax breaks to these retirement plans. As you know, or as you should know, tax breaks are usually granted to force some individual or corporation to act and behave in some manner pleasing to government. The Democrats plan to change the rules on pension and 401K accounts. Instead of just investing these funds in stocks and bonds, fund managers will be required by the government to invest these funds in certain investments dictated by government -- by Democrats. In this way the governments can fund some of their spending schemes, but without using government funds. The Democrats will simply pass laws requiring fund managers to invest in corporations building low income housing; or companies who are hiring workers off welfare roles. Other "allowed" investments will be in such things as environmental protection, waste recycling and other causes popular with the left. In short order the Democrats will have rules in place which state that these pension funds cannot be invested in companies that are "unfriendly" to unions. To a Democrat ... any company with a non-union workforce is "unfriendly" to unions. Corporations who have affirmative action programs will get the not. Companies who hire and promote on merit will not.

All of this will mean that the Democrats can claim credit for spending on some of their favorite programs without going to the taxpayers. They can just, in effect, use pension money. The end result, of course, is lower returns on pension fund investments -- and lower pension benefits to retirees. That doesn't bother the Democrats, though. The less money you have to retire on the more dependent on government you will be.

Force employers to pay for “family leave.”

Right now the Family Leave Act requires employers to give employees about 12 weeks of unpaid “family leave” to take care of certain family events and emergencies, such as having a baby, illness, death or some other situation. The key here is that the family leave is unpaid. The Democrats want employers to continue to pay the employees while they take their extended vacation. The Democrats “secret” plan is to begin with a law requiring payment of about one-half of the employee’s salary. This will give Democratic candidates the opportunity to campaign in future years on the basis of increasing the percentage paid to those on family leave. Paying people for not working --- a Democrat staple.

Seizure of property of those who flee Democratic tyranny
As Democrats work diligently for more control over our economy and increase levels of income redistribution many high-achieving Americans are making plans to run. The greater the confiscation of wealth becomes the more people start looking for other countries in which to base their businesses. Democrats have a “secret plan” to impose confiscatory taxes on any Americans who try to move their wealth or their business interests out of this country.

Government paid childcare for majority of voters
The absolute last thing a Democrat would ever do would be to suggest to anyone that they shouldn’t have a baby they can’t afford to raise. Democrats know that children are the absolute more important thing in the lives of millions of Americans. They have been working for decades to impose ever more expensive rules and regulations on private child care agencies. They have also been working to raise taxes to the point that it is difficult beyond reason to raise a child on the income of one working parent. Thus … the necessity of child care. If the government steps in and provides the funds for that child care then, to that extent, the parents become just that much more dependent on government … and Democrats.

Government control of all childhood education (indoctrination)
Democrats are the party of big government. Democrats are more than thrilled with the increased propensity of many Americans to look to government for the solution to virtually all problems they face in their daily lives. Democrats know that to teach people that they can expect the government to be there to solve all of their problems you have to start with the children. Catholic schools can be expected to teach their students that Catholicism is good. Jewish private schools are going to sing the praises of Judaism. Christian schools will teach the children that Jesus is really cool. Government schools? Government schools will promote what? Government! Thus, Democrats see a clear need to keep as many children in government education programs as possible. The “secret” plan? Continue to work against any ideas that would make it easier for parents to remove their children from government schools. This means working against such ideas as vouchers or tax credits to help parents afford the cost of private schools. They will also work to add increased regulations to parents who make the decision to home school their children.

Government imposed limits on executive income
This one is really going to have to wait until Democrats have a solid control of the federal machine. The Social Democrat party has plans to institute limits on executive compensation. The idea is to impose confiscatory corporate income taxes on companies who pay their top executives more than X-times the compensation paid to the lowest-paid employees.

Repealing the Second Amendment

Haven't you ever thought it a bit odd that leftists and Democrats are generally opposed to the concept of the private ownership of firearms, while conservatives and libertarians favor the idea? Well, there's a reason. Those who value and celebrate the worth of the individual and of individual freedom generally believe that the individual should be permitted to own and bear arms. Those who put the power of government over and above the power of the individual would just as soon see the individual unarmed. Armed individuals are, of course, a threat to tyranny.

Destroy talk radio

Democrats aren't fond of talk radio. They know that Rush Limbaugh played a huge role in the voter revolution of 1994. Leftists realize that almost all successful talk radio shows are hosted by people who do not share their political views. They will try to neutralize talk radio through regulation. Since Democrats love the "fair" word so much, they'll try to resurrect something called the "Fairness Doctrine." How would this law work? Well, for example, a talk show host would not be allowed to voice opposition to a particular Democrat goal without finding some Democrat to go on the air to defend that goal. Talk radio soared in listenership and popularity following the death of the Fairness Doctrine. Democrats know that talk radio can once again be pushed into the radio background with new regulations that stifle conservative and libertarian voices. Give them the power -- and it's time for me to retire. You should be aware that at a recent meeting of the Democratic Party of Oregon a resolution was adopted to use the power of government and the "fairness doctrine" to reign in those horrible right wing talk show hosts.”

“Republicans are so cute. They’re sort of like owning a pet lizard. They aren’t very intelligent but they’re fun to play with. When you ask them thought-provoking questions they get this vacant look in their eyes; then run to the nearest Think-Master.

Neil Boortz claims to be "Libertarian" which is probably as accurate as Ross Perot claiming to be "sane". There isn’t a real Libertarian in the world that would be stupid enough to support GW Bush - who is to civil liberties as an iceberg was to the Titanic. Libertarians who voted for Bush must feel like Jews who voted for Hitler – only worse.”

“I suppose anyone to the left of a fascist is a "leftist".”

“So UA, please lst all the civil liberties that you have personally lost under the Bush Administration.”

“First and foremost:

Free and fair election.”

“Tom,

I hope for your sake that you're joking. If you are, that's pretty funny.”

“Still crying... will they ever forget it... HE LOST!”

“That's right Bush lost!


And so did America!”

“Tom, you are a card! If you a referring the Presidential election of Nov. 2000, that happened under the Clinton Administration. My question to UA was what civil liberties he lost under the Bush Administration. Now, go shelve some books will ya?”

“Dissent will not be tolerated!”

“Huh?

Clinton was governor of Florida?”

“No, Clinton was co-President of the US with his wife Hillary. Look it up in one of the books in your library.

I asked UA what civil liberties he had lost under the Bush Administration and you replied "Free and Fair elections" to which I replied that the Nov 2000 election was conducted under the Clinton Administration. Do you understand now? Good! Now go clean up that spill in the reference section.”

“Tom,

You must've gotten manure for your brains. Why is it so common for liberal democrats to imply that anyone disagreeing with them is a nazi? Frankly, it harms your arguments more than it helps.”

“You haven’t really been paying attention, have you Savage? Privacy, search & seizure protection, due process, free speech, equal protection, right to counsel, open democracy, free press…

I know its all right because “we’re at war” and all but since this is the type of war that has no foreseeable end, these are permanent steps.

By the way, you have read that Bush is open to exploring “ballistic fingerprinting”, haven't you? Looks like one more right is about to go.”

“Spill???

Yeah, somebody puked all over the U.S. Constitution.”

“FG: Where do you live now? 'Bama??

Savage: Wish I could get a story like Woodward. Hey, if Bushie's elected for another four (shudder), that may come true!”

“Okay UA, Has your privacy been violated? Have you been unfairly searched and your property seized? Have you been denied the right to due process? Has your free speech been censured (by virtue of the fact that we are talking here, I would say no)? Have you been denied the right to counsel?

Just because you read about it on some obscure web site doesn't mean it's true.

As far as ballistic finger printing, the only thing I heard was from Charles Schumer, Communist,NY. However, I think it makes as much sense as teats on a bull.”

“Communist?

When ya can't think of something good, that'll do in a pinch.”

“Obscure website? It was in every major paper across the nation. Asscroft wanted give everyone a royal screwing and the Repubs were happy to go along with it. Fortunately, the court was not.”

“You’re very clueless, aren’t you Savage? Have you any idea what is contained in the USA PATRIOT ACT? For all I know, my home has been searched, my internet usage tracked, my house of worship monitored and my library records seized because my opinions fit the very loose definition of a domestic terrorist under the act. I have no way of knowing because they don’t have to tell me anymore. God help me if I were declared an enemy combatant.

Try looking at a newspaper about the ballistic fingerprinting issue. You can read can't you?”

“Rosey Hearst,
Has your privacy been violated? Have you been unfairly searched and your property seized? Have you been denied the right to due process? Has your free speech been censured (by virtue of the fact that we are talking here, I would say no)? Have you been denied the right to counsel? Do you personally know someone who has?

Hah, you believe what you read in newspapers? Heck, those stories are created by guys like you.”

“No, not personally, but if Asscroft has his way they might be.

I'm not gonna allow some right-wing crackpot to steamroller the nation in his quest for, "justice." Just like the Nazis, a little nibble at a time.”

“Funny, I bet you weren't this concerned when Janet Reno's Justice Department torched Waco, shot up Ruby Ridge, seized Elian Gonzales etc. Could be that you're a Republiphobe.

By the way, nice treaty your boy Clinton signed with North Korea.”

“Way To Go Guys!

Looks like you flushed out another Timothy McVeigh wannabe.”

“Another idiot from the left sounds off. Yeah, I want to be just like McVeigh..... dead!

Hah! At least we know which way you're tilted.”

“Watch it guys. You'll get on the list.”

“Yup. Journalists and artists are always the first people killed off so that list fits right in.”

“I'm not on the list. What I say?”

“Yes, I eschew mass murder, LOL.

Truly astounding.



That site's a scream, V.

Look Out George! Them Hollywood types are going to "spwe their anti-American garabage".”