Tags: Oh | This | Just | Tooooo | Rich

Oh, This Is Just Tooooo Rich

Wednesday, 06 February 2002 12:00 AM

See if you can find a copy of the 2000 Houston Astros Media Guide. Don't bother opening it. Just turn to the back cover.

There you will find a full-page advertisement for none other than Enron! The ad shows a hand holding a baseball … with the words "Sometimes it's the things you don't see that have the biggest impact."

You don't say!

I guess you've heard about this one. The Los Angeles Times conducted a little poll about Bush, Enron, taxes and such. One of the questions – and I'll paraphrase here – was something like "Do you think the Bush White House should keep the records of its secret bailout meetings with Enron from the Congress?"

So, what's the problem? The problem is WHAT "secret bailout meetings"? There is no evidence that Enron ever talked to the Bush White House about a bailout!

This is called "push-polling." The purpose of the poll is not so much to accurately gauge public opinion as it is to put an idea into the minds of those being polled.

One of the more famous examples is a Democratic push-poll that was done before a recent election. People were asked the following question of a candidate (again, paraphrased.) "Would you support (the Republican candidate) if you knew he had a history of arrests for child molestation?"

Of course, there WAS no such history ... and the question didn't actually say that there was. Note the use of the word "IF."

Pure Carville stuff.

The Los Angeles Times poll also contained a loaded question about the Bush tax cuts. Guess what? Eighty-one percent said that they do not want Bush's tax cuts to go forward if it means that the money for those tax cuts would have to come from the Social Security surplus.

You do realize, don't you, that when we talk about going back on the tax cuts we're only talking about the cuts being offered to higher-income earners. You can bet that the people polled by the Times were, for the most part, people who would not lose one red cent if the tax cuts on the high-income earners were eliminated.

Simply put – the majority of people in this country don't think they have a stake in the argument over eliminating the tax cuts for the high achievers. Since they don't believe it matters to them – that it won't take any money out of

This is what Democrats have been working toward for decades. This is your proof that their long-term game plan is working.

Some day soon we will reach the point where the majority of the people in this country have no federal income tax liability at all. Then some proponent of smaller government will come along and propose an income tax cut.

The Los Angeles Times, CNN, the New York Times, CBS, ABC, NBC, the Boston Globe, the Washington Post and the rest of the mainstream leftist press will start rolling out the polls showing that a majority of Americans don't think a tax cut is the right thing to do.

Don't you just love it when a plan comes together? The leftists sure do.

One certain Democratic victory that will result from the Enron debacle will be a resurrected campaign finance reform law. Make no mistake – whatever law passes the Congress (and one certainly will), it will benefit Democratic candidates.

Ron Paul is a libertarian serving as a Republican congressman from Texas. He nails it with this quotation on campaign finance reform:

Our federal government, which was intended to operate as a very limited constitutional republic, has instead become a virtually socialist leviathan that redistributes trillions of dollars. We can hardly be surprised when countless special interests fight for the money. The only true solution to the campaign money problem is a return to a proper constitutional government that does not control the economy. Big government and big campaign money go hand in hand.

– Ron Paul, R-Texas, "Texas Straight Talk," 2/4/02

Some weekend real soon I'm heading to Hilton Head, S.C., to play golf. I'm going to drive. I'm going to stop at the South Carolina Welcome Station and look for those NAACP idiots who are trying to promote a South Carolina tourism boycott. Then I'm going to strongly suggest that they attempt a physically impossible act.

Enron, Enron, Enron. But nobody's talking about Global Crossing? Could it be because so many Democrats – Terry McAuliffe, for instance – are implicated?

So ... do you think that someone over yonder at MSNBC might have lost their job over this one?

Johnny Taliban's lawyers want him out on bail. Good idea – maybe his Papa will give him another few grand for a ticket back to the Middle East where he can get his sorry ass shot by some Afghan freedom fighter. Save the American taxpayers some money.

Saudi Arabia has finally admitted that 15 of the Sept. 11 hijackers were Saudi citizens. Let's see, it's been almost five months now. I wonder what their first clue was.

Enron handed out over $55 million in bonuses to selected managers just two days before filing bankruptcy – but couldn't come up with anything for the 4,500 workers who lost their jobs. Democrats are anxious to find proof that George Bush ordered the bonuses.

CNN didn't even OFFER me the TalkBack Live job. No – I didn't want it, but they didn't even offer it! It's racism, I tell you. Pure racism!

He said that there weren't enough votes to pass either the Democrat's or the Republican's stimulus plan. That, my friends, is a lie. A strict lie.

It is true that there aren't enough votes there to pass the Democratic plan … but there were most definitely votes enough – 53, to be exact – to pass the Bush plan.

Not enough votes? Wrong. The votes are there. Problem is – the votes are for the wrong plan.

Are you starting to see why it is so important to return the Senate to Republican control in the next election?

Read this next section to see why it is so important for the Democrats to make sure that the Republican economic stimulus bill doesn't get passed ... and it has nothing whatsoever to do with tax cuts.

It's more than social spending programs. Buried in this middle of the debate over stimulus plans you will find the basic difference between the Republicans and the Social Democrat party.

It boils down to this: Either you exercise responsibility for your own life, or the government takes that responsibility – and the control that goes with it.

The Democratic Party grows on government dependence. People who are dependent on government for almost any aspect of their economic or social survival can be counted on to vote for Democrats.

So – what's the big stumbling block here?

One of the main differences between the Republican and the Democratic stimulus package lies in the provisions for health care, and here you can see a basic – and very important – difference between the parties.

The issue here is extended health care benefits. What do you do about people who lost their jobs in the slowing economy and are facing a loss of their employer-provided health insurance?

First – the Democratic plan. Encourage employers to continue health care coverage for laid-off employees by covering 75 percent of the cost of that coverage with taxpayer funds.

On top of this, the Democrats want to expand certain Medicaid benefits. (Remember that Medicare is the retirement health care program that you pay for during your working years. Medicaid is pure welfare … taxpayer-funded health care.)

Now – the Republican plan. Give tax credits to laid-off employees if they purchase their own health care coverage. In fact, the Republicans have even torn a page out of the Democratic playbook here … they want these tax credits to be "refundable."

Here's what we mean. If you are laid off and you spend $3,000 to buy health insurance for your family, you get a $3,000 tax credit.

But what if you only owe $2,000 in federal income taxes? Well, your tax liability is completely wiped out AND you get a $1,000 check from the government for the difference!

So – in a nutshell, both the Republicans and the Democrats have a proposal in the stimulus plan to make it easier for laid-off employees to keep their health insurance coverage.

The Republicans make it easier for these individuals to go out and get the coverage for themselves, while the Democrats hand taxpayer funds over to the employers as a bribe to get the employers to continue the coverage for their laid-off employees.

Under the Republican plan the laid-off employees are responsible for getting their own coverage. The government will help them pay for it by lowering their tax burden.

Under the Democratic plan the employers and/or the government continues to carry the responsibility for providing the health insurance to laid-off employees … or the welfare Medicaid program picks up the slack.

You do see the solid philosophical difference here, don't you? It's the difference between people being responsible for themselves and the government being responsible for people.

Democrats are absolutely scared to total and complete maggot-filled death over the prospect of individual Americans exercising one iota of independence or personal accountability in arranging for their own health care coverage.

To a Democrat, health care should be the responsibility of anyone BUT the individual. You just simply cannot allow individual Americans to get even the slightest whiff of self-sufficiency! Self-sufficiency is poison to the Democratic anthill.

If you spend enough time watching politics in Washington, you will soon see the obvious … Democrats and their union fellow travelers will ALWAYS oppose any legislative initiative that will take responsibility for the lives of individuals away from government and hand it back to the people.

This is the essence of a collectivist mentality.

Evidently, removing the Confederate flag from the state capitol in South Carolina didn't have the desired result. Poor blacks are still poor, inner-city housing projects are still nests of crime and drugs, the illegitimate-birth rate among black teens is still too high, and the anti-achievement mentality is still prevalent in majority-black government schools.

The NAACP, understandably disappointed that its efforts on behalf of poor black children have thus far failed, has decided to step up its campaign.

The next step in improving the lives of blacks and black children in South Carolina will be to set up little information booths at the state welcome stations on the interstate highways. They want to convince travelers that they should just drive right on through the state without stopping.

Well, maybe a bathroom break would be OK ... but that's it. Stay away from Myrtle Beach. Don't go to Hilton Head. Ignore Charleston. Keep your money in your pocket.

Yeah … that ought to do it. Just keep your money out of South Carolina. Deny that tax revenue to the state. With less money to spend on the needs of the citizens, the lives of all young blacks should be improved greatly.

Sunday night at New York's Waldorf, the liberal elite (and "an impudent core of effete snobs who characterize themselves as intellectuals") beat a path to the feet of our former rapist-president Bill Clinton to savor his every word as he talked off-the-cuff about the past, present and future.

In the same manner in which he previously stated that he'd missed getting Osama bin Laden by just a matter of hours, Clinton told the adoring fans that he'd also just missed making a Middle East peace deal by a few weeks.

He predicted that when a peace agreement is finally reached, it will look very similar to the deal he almost got them to agree to in his last month in office.

Then there was the subject of North Korea. Once again the liar lamented about how close he'd come to bringing that insane regime into the 21st century. In fact, according to the New York Times article, he made it sound as if he'd left the Bush administration with a slam-dunk.

With North Korea, he said, "I figure I left the next administration with a big foreign policy win," one that he hinted Mr. Bush had squandered with unnecessarily hard language early last year.

He proudly told the SRO crowd, "I did the best I could and had a good time trying." Well, in the immortal words of Yoda, "Do or do not ... there is no "try."

It seems the more time that passes, the more we see what the Clinton legacy will be: "I ALMOST did it!" What's that old line about horseshoes and hand grenades?

Oh, and with probably the most asinine line since "I feel your pain," Bubba the Benevolent proclaimed, "I cried for Argentina." You are now free to utilize your barf bags.

NRA president Charlton Heston declared that he has never used a bodyguard, in spite of death threats and stalkers. He says that he has 10 firearms at home and would not hesitate to use them to protect himself or his wife.

He said that "stars" who use bodyguards are usually people who are on the lower echelon of Hollywood society who are using the private security to make themselves look more important than they are (are you listening, Rosie?).

Hey, it's a triple whammie! If you plan on mugging Moses, you run the risk of being smitten by his cane OR being shot OR being strangled by his toupee. Given a choice, if I were a criminal I'd go after Rosie long before I went after Ben Hur ... and that's one of the most important side effects of the Second Amendment.

© 2019 Newsmax. All rights reserved.

1Like our page
See if you can find a copy of the 2000 Houston Astros Media Guide. Don't bother opening it. Just turn to the back cover. There you will find a full-page advertisement for none other than Enron! The ad shows a hand holding a baseball … with the words Sometimes it's the...
Wednesday, 06 February 2002 12:00 AM
Newsmax Media, Inc.

Newsmax, Moneynews, Newsmax Health, and Independent. American. are registered trademarks of Newsmax Media, Inc. Newsmax TV, and Newsmax World are trademarks of Newsmax Media, Inc.

America's News Page
© Newsmax Media, Inc.
All Rights Reserved