In this edition....

WHAT’S MISSING FROM BUSH’S TAX PLAN?
AND TO THINK, WE COULD HAVE HAD SOCIALIZED MEDICINE!! 
THEY WANT THE MONEY 



WHAT’S MISSING FROM BUSH’S TAX PLAN

Yes .. it's better than nothing. And, yes ... I would sure like to keep about seven percent more of the money that I make, so I do hope the Bush tax cut gets by the Social Democratic party. Having said that, there are some real deficiencies. Just to name a few:

No plan for downsizing government. The ultimate objective should be to reduce the federal government to its constitutionally mandated role. If this were done there would be no need for any income taxes at all! 
Bush calls for no restrictions on future tax increases. How about a two-thirds supermajority in congress for any future increases? 
I don't like the idea of removing more Americans from the tax rolls. Everyone really ought to pay something. We're getting so dangerously close to the point where the majority of American voters will have no federal tax liability whatsoever. Not good. These are people who could not be counted on to support tax cuts. In effect, they constitute a new and ever-growing welfare class. 
And just where is a proposal to reduce the capital gains tax? You want to energize the economy? This is the way to do it, fast! 




AND TO THINK, WE COULD HAVE HAD SOCIALIZED MEDICINE!!

Recently a private school kindergarten class went on a field trip to visit the Norcross Post Office on Mitchell Street. It was not a very pleasant experience. Here's a letter from one of the parents who accompanied the students:

""I'm LIVID. But I'll be brief. 

For the last 6 weeks my 5 year old daughter's Kindergarten class has been planning a tour of the local Norcross post office. They made things in class to send to relatives or friends. 

After NUMEROUS confirmation calls to the Supervisor, everything was set. Upon arrival, the specified clerk made about a 10 minute speech about how each child would pay for the postage and then explained in detail about how they would tour the back to see how the package was processed. She then opened a separate window for the children to pay. After the 22 children (2 classes) had paid for their packages, out of nowhere the clerk looks at her watch and announced that she had simply ran out of time.... Sorry! 

"Wait a minute" the teacher said. "YOU were the one who insisted they pay first. If we would have known this, we would have taken the tour and THEN paid for the packages." 

"Oh No" the clerk said. "We can't have you bothering our paying customers by getting in the regular lines. Sorry, I'm just out of time." 

After a brief conversation, the teacher quickly determines that talking to the clerk is a brick wall. With a great deal of resistance from the clerk, the teacher finally "insisted" on seeing the supervisor. 

22 children, 2 teachers and 4 parents waited in the lobby. They waited, and waited, and waited. The clerk finally returned to announce that the Supervisor was "too busy" to talk to them. The teacher immediately asked for his name. which took a great deal of prodding to get. Not satisfied, she then asked for HIS supervisors name.... to which the clerk answered "Well, I guess HIS boss would be the Postmaster General... but I don't know his name." 

Yes, I Am STEAMING. But in all truth, I could not have asked for my daughter to get a better, truer, more vivid education about what our government is REALLY like. 

And they wonder why I send her to a private school...""
"
Can you imagine socialized medicine after reading a story like this? "I'm sorry Mr. Jones, I don't have time to finish your triple bypass. Yaaaaaaaba Dabba Doo!" 




THEY WANT THE MONEY

The New York Times does not have funny pages. I sometimes wonder about that because it seems to me that there are more laughs in their editorial page than in all the comic strips combined. Here's an illustration from Thursday's lead editorial entitled, "Are Democrats Ready On Taxes?" 

"Democrats must devise and sell an alternative that is more limited in scope, more fair for the middle class, and more likely to help rather than hurt the economy." 

Let's dissect here. Do you think The New York Times or anybody else in the news media has any idea what will help the economy? Do they have the slightest clue as to what led to the prosperity of the 1980's and '90's? They say that the Democrats must come up with an alternative that is more likely to help rather than hurt the economy. The implication is clear: Bush's plan is going to hurt the economy. 

This isn't an editorial. It's The New York Times giving the Democrats marching orders to sell an alternative tax plan that is "more fair." I call this the liberals' SDI, Strategic Demagoguery Initiative. 

As has been widely reported, Tom Daschle said the other day that, "If you make one million dollars a year under the Bush plan, your tax cut would be big enough to buy a new Lexus. If you're from an average working family, you can get a new muffler for your used car." 

According to Tom Daschle and "Little Dick" Gephardt, the rich guy who gets this tax cut is going to go out and buy a luxury car - and to them that's bad. It's gotten to the point that we stigmatize the people who make this country work. We tell them that they're greedy if they demand to keep more of what they earn. It's almost a crime, which can be used as a negative to defeat policy. 

But it's none of your business, Misters Daschle and Gephardt, what people do with their legally-earned, hard-won money, whether it comes from a tax cut or not. Your disdain for the people who make this country work and for liberty overall is shameful. 

The truth of the matter is, liberals are against any tax cut at all, because they want the money - your money - to spend themselves. It's that simple. 

And it's not just Daschle and Gephardt. It is virtually every opponent to tax cuts. A Thursday San Francisco Chronicle headline says it all: "Bush's Tax Cut Plan a Boon to the Region but Bay Area Democrats in Congress Oppose It." 

When The New York Times decides to editorialize, giving hints to the Democratic Party on an alternative tax bill "fair" to the middle class, who decides what is fair? Is it the liberal snobs of the Times editorial page? Is it Tom Daschle and Dick Gephardt driving to press conferences in their limousines?