Fight The Bias - Newsletter Issue #18
04/13/2001
In
This Edition #18
ANOTHER
EVIL GUN SAVES THE DAY
HOW
LIBERAL SPIN IS KILLING THE TAX CUT
DEMOCRATS
--- BUILDING A COMPLETE FREE RIDE FOR THEIR CONSTITUENTS.
GUN
CONTROL DOESN'T WORK
USING TAX POLICY TO CONTROL PRIVATE BEHAVIOR
ANOTHER
EVIL GUN SAVES THE DAY
There
was a little situation overnight in Banks County, Georgia.
Thank goodness the gun wasn’t locked up --- safe from children,
you know.
A 36-year-old man shows up at the front door of a house, bangs on the
door, and demands to see his ex-wife. He’s told that she's not
there. “Go away.”
He
doesn’t.
This
ex-husband, you see, has a long and rich history of beating the crap out
of his now ex-wife. Apparently
he thought it was time for another whipping.
The
predatory ex keeps banging on the door, trying to break it down.
Inside the house is his 16-year-old stepson. When the wife-beater
kicks the door down and rushes into the house, the teen fires.
One stepfather now taking the eternal celestial dirt nap.
Police
say they don't intend to file charges against the stepson. The dead
man had been jailed before on domestic violence charges. And there
were two small children in the house.
Omigod!
Two small children in the house!
And a gun! How can
that be? Goodness gracious! Don’t
they know these children could have been hurt?
Go ahead, gun grabbers. Try
to convince us that this situation would have been better if that evil,
evil gun hadn't been there. Are you going to tell me this ex-husband
was trying to break down the door just so he could have a leisurely chat
with his ex-wife?
Stories like this--law-abiding Americans using guns for
self-defense--happen more than 2.5 million times a year. That's
about 7,000 times daily. The Banks County case is unusual because
the gun was actually fired! In more than 98 percent of cases the gun
is never fired. The vast majority of the time, all you have to do is
brandish the gun to scare away your attacker.
But you won't hear this from the anti-gun crowd. This kind of story
drives them nuts because it puts gun ownership in a positive light.
HOW
LIBERAL SPIN IS KILLING THE TAX CUT
Want
to know how the Democrats are systematically gutting George W. Bush's tax
cut? Turn on your television.
The
Media Research Center has just released a study of network news coverage
of the Bush tax cut plan. They looked at 93 tax stories that
appeared on ABC, CBS, and NBC from January 20 through March 31. The
findings:
- When
quoting tax cut supporters and opponents, the networks quoted Bush
plan opponents five times more often than they quoted supporters.
- Network
reporters, led by NBC's Tom Brokaw and CBS' Dan Rather, labeled the
Bush tax plan as "big" or "very big" on 30
different occasions.
- No
broadcast reporter ever described Bush's tax cut as modest or small.
- Liberals'
standard complaint that the Bush plan would favor the wealthy received
twice as much airplay (31 times) as the opposing point of view (15
times).
- NBC
and ABC both reported that Bush's plan would offer a greater
percentage tax reduction to lower- and middle-income families...but
CBS never did.
- None
of the networks reported that the last income tax increase in 1993
targeted higher-income families...and none of them bothered to report
that the top five percent of income-earners pay more than half of the
taxes.
- CBS
was the least likely to convey comments from Bush or other tax cut
supporters touting the economic benefits of a tax cut.
In
fact, CBS did the biggest job of telling the American people that a tax
cut would be bad for the nation's economy. The Media Research Center
concludes that CBS "displayed a unique antagonism toward the tax cut
and the arguments made on its behalf."
The
people in charge at ABC, CBS, and NBC aren't journalists anymore, folks.
They ceased to be journalists the moment they compromised their principles
in favor of reporting just one side of the story--the Democrats' side.
You've seen the statistics that say more than 90 percent of newspaper
editors and reporters vote Democrat. And now you've seen the hatchet
job the broadcast networks are doing on the Bush tax cut plan.
DEMOCRATS
--- BUILDING A COMPLETE FREE RIDE FOR THEIR CONSTITUENTS.
I’ve
brought this up a few times --- thus far with no real reaction. It
doesn’t seem to bother people, yet it should.
If the productive American people don’t wake up to this
Democratic game plan sometime soon the ballot box will have been stripped
from the hands of those who pay the bills, and the game will essentially
be over.
Now
--- just what am I talking about? It’s
the Democratic efforts to take about one-half of American wage earners and
remove them from any responsibility to pay any federal taxes of any kind.
This includes income taxes, Social Security taxes and Medicare
taxes. The Democrats want ALL
of these taxes to be paid only by upper-income wage earners – those more
likely to vote Republican than Democrat.
You’ve
seen the Democrats fighting this battle in their demands that tax cuts be
given to people who don’t pay income taxes.
The Democrats want a portion of the excess income taxes collected
from upper-income Americans to be used to cover some of the Social
Security and Medicare taxes for lower-income earners.
This means that these middle and lower income Americans would be
entitled to and receive Social Security and Medicare benefits that they
did not pay for --- that were paid for by someone else.
Now
– something new. You know
about this so-called “Earned Income Tax Credit” (EITC)
haven’t you? It’s
not a tax credit at all. It’s
a welfare payment. If a
person earns an EITC in the amount of $2000, but only owes $650 in income
taxes, the government wipes out the income tax liability and writes that
person a check for $1350. That
$1350, of course, was taken from someone else who actually worked for it.
It’s a transfer of income.
Now
the Democrats are pushing for an expansion of the EITC program to cover
“payroll” (Social Security and Medicare) taxes as well as income
taxes. The goal?
To put more and more people on a complete free ride.
I’ll
say it again, folks, and maybe it will sink through a few more skulls.
These politicians are moving us toward a taxing and voting system
where the tax load -- and
we’re talking income taxes, Social Security taxes and Medicare Taxes --
is shouldered by high-producers and achievers in the upper 30% of
income-earners while those in the lower 70% get a free ride.
Can’t
you see the political campaigns of the future?
Democrats will be warning voters “If you vote for Republicans,
they’re going to make you pay income taxes and they’ll make you pay
for your Social Security and your Medicare.”
GUN
CONTROL DOESN'T WORK
And
now here's the medical evidence.
There's
a new article that appears in the spring issue of the Medical Sentinel,
the official journal of the Association of American Physicians and
Surgeons. It's a study that finds most gun violence studies from the
last 20 years are based on flawed methodology, and they're unduly
influenced by political agendas--thus leading to biased and incorrect
conclusions. Supposedly objective studies weren't objective at all,
because the people conducting them were blinded by their own prejudices.
They set a goal and then tweaked the data to achieve it.
The
author of this study is Dr. Miguel Faria, editor-in-chief of Medical
Sentinel. Faria found that:
- Women
in particular are NOT in more danger if they carry or own guns.
- The
ease of access to or availability of guns is NOT the cause of crime.
- Mass
killings would NOT be avoided if guns were not available.
- Gun
violence is NOT the leading accidental cause of death in children.
The
Association of American Physicians and Surgeons has long been a thorn in
the side of the anti-gun groups. They've recently held the feet of
several doctors' groups to the fire for their obvious left-leaning
anti-gun biases--and their decision to ask patients about gun ownership.
Will
the gun-grabbing doctors be able to come up with a logical argument
against Miguel Faria and the AAPS? Not likely. Because Faria's
statistics are based in rock-solid fact...and the only arguments
anti-gunners can counter with are based in emotion. In this battle
of wits, they're the ones who are unarmed.
USING
TAX POLICY TO CONTROL PRIVATE BEHAVIOR
As
you know, or as you should know, government has one asset that you don’t
have. One valuable asset that private businesses don’t have.
That asset is the ability to use force to accomplish its goals.
Just
by way of example --- If the government sets up an absurd retirement and
disability insurance program with a net zero rate of return on your
investment, and if you chose not to purchase this insurance program, the
government can pull out a gun and force you to buy the product.
Could a private insurance company do this?
The
government can also use this force to seize your money and other property
to be used for it’s goals and purposes.
Ok
… so if the government has the legal power to use a gun to take your
money from you, can’t we at least expect that the money would be used
for legitimate purposes? Do
you think that the government should be able to use this police power to,
say, take your money from you and then offer to give that money back if,
and only if, you agree to do certain things that the government wants you
to do?
That
brings us to a little proposal from a physician in Texas named Kenneth H.
Cooper. This man matters to
you because he is the odds-on favorite to become the next Surgeon General
of the United States. Cooper
is already excited about his upcoming job.
He has submitted a 15-point “national health agenda” to his pal
George W. Bush.
Here’s
the plan. Cooper wants the
government to take $1000 from you and then offer to let you have that
money back if, and only if you engage in certain personal behavior the
government likes. In this
case the government wants you to not smoke, control your weight and watch
your cholesterol. You will be
entitled to recover $250 of your own money if you keep your body mass
index under 25, don’t smoke, keep your cholesterol under 200 and manage
your blood pressure. Each item is worth $250 of your own money.
Is
this the type of government you want?
A government that allows you to work, then steps in to seize your
money, and holds that money over your head to be returned if you behave
like a good little government subject?
Neil Boortz is a syndicated talk show host based in Atlanta Georgia. You can visit his website at http://www.boortz.com.
|