Copyrighted © 2004 – Joseph K. Waltenbaugh

  [Top of page]

July 4, 2004

Promises, promises, and more promises.  All politicians make them.  Surprisingly, some even keep them.  George W. Bush kept his campaign promises—especially the one about lowering taxes—and that totally confounded his critics.  After all, following through on promises just doesn’t happened in Washington D.C.  But what about John Kerry and his campaign promises? 

Kerry has openly promised to raise the dividend tax from 15% to 35%.  He has promised to raise the capital gain tax from 15% to 20%.  And he has promised to raise the death tax.  What’s up with that?  Has he decided to run on a platform of “Vote for me so I can take away more of your money?” 

And it doesn’t stop there.  Remember last year’s tax rebate check and the larger tax refund you received this year?  Kerry proudly promises to take that away.  He wants to reinstate the marriage penalty and raise the tax rates.  He also wants to decrease the amount of the child deduction.  (Evidently, he doesn’t think you need any more money to raise your children.)  He also promises to raise taxes on small businesses from 35% to 40%, and he supports the double and triple taxation of investments and savings.  

So are we to believe him?  If elected, will Kerry keep his campaign promises like President Bush did?  I think it’s fair to assume that any Democrat promising to raise taxes has every intention of following through on that commitment.  Democrats have a track record of raising taxes even when promising to lower them.  So why wouldn’t a Democrat raise taxes when he promises to raise them?  It’s a no-brainer.   

Speaking of no-brainer, I recall another Democrat presidential candidate who also promised to raise taxes.  His name was Walter Mondale, and we know what happened to him.

Copyrighted © 2004 – Joseph K. Waltenbaugh

  [Top of page]

[Top of page]

[Top of page]

[Top of page]

[Top of page]

[Top of page]

[Top of page]

[Top of page]

[Top of page]

[Top of page]

March 3, 2001

Democrats vs. The People

He’s the cure for the common Democratic lie, the antidote to the Clinton recession. He’s our president, George W. Bush, and he’s standing up for us and for our freedom. He’s laid down the gauntlet through a proposal to prevent Washington from taking from us more than it needs. In other words, he wants to let us keep more of the money we work for and earn. He’s trying to give us a tax cut—all of us.

I have a friend who expressed the hope that the president will succeed in expanding the charitable donation deduction to those who don’t itemize on their tax returns, and I’ve another friend who is hopeful that the marriage penalty will be abolished. The ironic thing is that both these individuals voted for Al Gore who was pointedly against the very things these two people desire. I also work with someone who commented that her single status means that tax cuts are never applicable to her, and that was one of the reasons she voted for Gore. That’s why tax reductions never affect her: she votes only for those people who want to give tax reductions to other people—the so-called targeted tax cuts.

In order to combat the president’s efforts to refund to us our overpaid taxes, the Democrats are reverting to their usual worn-out lies, and they are spouting this “targeted tax cut” garbage again. Targeted tax cuts only mean that they paint targets on our backs in order to gouge us and keep our money under their control in Washington where they dole it out to buy votes from their constituent groups. Unfortunately, Americans aren’t real bright and they believe the Democratic lies. Their basic ignorance does not let them see that Democrats despise and loathe them, and that’s why Democrats see nothing wrong with robbing them blind and lying to them all the while. They’ve been made stupid and gullible, and the Democrats intend to keep them that way. Perhaps that’s why education is another of George W. Bush’s top priorities.

I don’t know what will happen with the president’s tax cut proposal. The Democrats in Congress are very good liars, and the Republicans in Congress are cowards for the most part. But George W. Bush is out there championing our cause, taking on the liars, cowards, and the ignorant masses. Somehow, I think he’ll succeed. Before the election, I asked everyone who planned to vote for Gore if they would give me their tax refunds when Bush implemented his tax cut pledge. I wonder how many checks I’ll receive in the mail.

Copyrighted © 2001 – Joseph K. Waltenbaugh

[Top of page]

January 27, 2001

An Angel in the Whirlwind

In his inaugural address, George W. Bush referenced a letter written to Thomas Jefferson by Virginia statesman John Page after the signing of the Declaration of Independence. In his letter, Page asked the question: “Do you not think an Angel rides in the Whirlwind and directs this Storm?” When Bush unexpectedly was able to defend and hold onto his presidential victory in the face of an ominous Democratic Party poised to rob him of it, I read an editorial in which the author asked the question: “Am I the only one who sees the hand of God in this?”

I am another who sees the hand of God in that storm, and so too is George W. Bush. His inaugural speech and his first actions as President reflect that vision. One of his first actions was to declare a day of prayer on the Sunday following Inauguration Day, and that was quickly followed by his executive order stopping the granting of federal funds to international family planning organizations that sponsor or promote abortions. He has also been out there setting a tone of civility and gaining support from those you would expect to be his sworn enemies. He has promised to change the tone in Washington, and he has been incredibly successful in his first two weeks in office.

Of course, there are the diehard liberals who will always condemn him. These he will never win over as allies. I’m talking about the far left extremists such as the pro-abortion feminists who started attacking him about abortion even before he issued his executive order. But Bush, like most of his supporters, knows one thing for certain: God, the creator of all life, is staunchly pro-life. That is why you won’t see George W. Bush back away from his pro-life position. As savvy a politician as he is, and as much as he wishes to build alliances in order to accomplish his goals, he recognizes the one true ally he needs and without whom he cannot succeed—the One whose hand directs the Storm.

In answer to John Page’s question; yes, an Angel does ride in the Whirlwind.

Copyrighted © 2001 – Joseph K. Waltenbaugh

[Top of page]

January 18, 2001

The Long Goodbye

Tonight I watched Bill Clinton’s farewell address. It was as inconsequential as was his presidency. On the whole, he is a corrupt, immoral man, and he was a bad president who set us on a course to a recession, gutted our military, and precipitated our current energy crisis. Now he’s nothing more than a has-been and an irritant.

The farewell that has me really excited is my farewell to Dan Rather, Tom Brokaw, Peter Jennings, and everyone at CNN. For at least four years, I have been badgering my cable TV supplier (Adelphia Communications) to provide the Fox News Channel as a programming option. They’ve made it a habit to ignore me, and, recently, they sent me an email informing that they have no intention of ever carrying the Fox News Channel.

I don’t know if it was that email or the horrendous, biased news coverage by the major networks of the presidential election that spurred me to go out in search of a satellite dish. But now I have the dish, and I get all the Fox News I want. Fair and balanced is their motto, and that’s exactly what they give you. It’s so refreshing. It’s the best decision I ever made—and I’m even saving money over what I used to pay for cable.

I take great joy in being able to say I never again have to see Dan Rather, Tom Brokaw, Peter Jennings, or anyone at CNN. The rating woes of CNN and the major networks tell me I’m not the only one.

Copyrighted © 2001 – Joseph K. Waltenbaugh

[Top of page]

December 22, 2000

A Christmas Tale

Now in the sixth month the angel Gabriel was sent from God to a town of Galilee called Nazareth to a virgin betrothed to a man named Joseph, of the house of David, and the virgin’s name was Mary . . . And the angel said . . . “thou shalt conceive in thy womb and shall bring forth a son; and thou shalt call his name Jesus” . . .

Now it came to pass . . . that a decree went forth from Caesar Augustus that a census of the whole world should be taken . . . And Joseph also went from Galilee out of the town of Nazareth . . . to the town of David . . . called Bethlehem . . . to register with Mary, his espoused wife, who was with child . . . And it came to pass that she brought forth her firstborn son . . . and laid him in a manger because there was no room for them in the inn . . .And it came to pass . . that shepherds . . . found Mary and Joseph and the babe lying in a manger . . 

In the days of King Herod, behold, Magi came from the East to Jerusalem, saying, “Where is he that is born king of the Jews?” . . . But . . . King Herod . . . was troubled . . . and he inquired . . . where the Christ was to be born . . . And they said . . . thus it is written by the prophet, “And thus, Bethlehem, of the land of Juda, . . . for from thee shall come forth a leader who shall rule my people Israel’ . . . Now they . . . went their way . . . And behold the star . . . stood over the place . . . And entering the house, they found the child with Mary . . .

But . . . an angel . . . appeared in a dream to Joseph, saying, “Arise . . . and flee into Egypt . . . for Herod will seek the child to destroy him . . . So he arose . . . and withdrew to Egypt . . . Then Herod . . . slew all the boys in Bethlehem and all its neighborhood who were two years old or under . . . But when Herod was dead, behold, an angel . . . appeared in a dream to Joseph . . . and said, “Arise . . and go into the land of Israel, for those who sought the child’s life are dead”. . . So he arose . . . and went into . . . Israel . . . But hearing that Archelaus was reigning in Judea in place of his father, Herod . . . he was afraid to go there and . . . he withdrew into the region of Galilee . . . and settled in a town called Nazareth.

I don't know about you, but I'm not buying it. It might sound a little odd that I should be questioning the veracity of this well-known story, but I have harbored some doubts about it since my elementary days in parochial school. Of course, I never voiced any of these concerns to the nuns who taught me--I placed too high a value on my life to do something that foolish--but I had these doubts nonetheless.

For example, both Mary and Joseph were from the house and lineage of David. So why, before they were married, were they living in the town of Nazareth in the region of Galilee instead of in Bethlehem, the city of David? We are told that Mary was living in Galilee before her marriage because that's where the angel Gabriel supposedly went to announce her participatory role in God's plan of salvation. And here’s another thing. Because of the census, Joseph and Mary traveled all the way to Bethlehem where Mary gave birth, and they were still in Bethlehem when the Magi arrived from the East. The nuns told me that it might have taken up to two years for the Magi to get to Bethlehem. So what were Jesus, Mary, and Joseph still doing in Bethlehem when the Magi arrived? Were they back for a vacation? We know that the Magi went to Bethlehem because that's where they told Herod they were heading and that's where the prophecy told them to go. And we know that it might have taken up to two years for the Magi to arrive because Herod slew all the male children in Bethlehem up to two years of age in an effort to kill Jesus.

That brings me back to the residence of the Holy Family. Joseph fled into Egypt with Mary and Jesus to escape Herod, and they didn't return until Herod died. Being a little suspect of Herod's son, Joseph didn’t return to Judea but instead settled his family in a different town, Nazareth in Galilee. But isn't that where they were supposed to have been living in the first place? As you can see, it doesn't add up.

These inconsistencies bothered me for the longest time. Every year at this time I would hear the story again, and every year the doubts would resurface. Then, a few years ago, I stumbled across an article by someone--I can't recall his name--who must have had some of the same doubts I did. Fortunately, he was a Bible scholar who also had lived in the Holy Land and spent years studying the customs of the inhabitants. He made some keen observations and arrived at some sensible conclusions.

First, he speculated that Mary and Joseph originally lived in Bethlehem, not in Nazareth. They were direct descendents of David, so it only made sense that they would have lived in David’s city of Bethlehem. As for the birth of Christ taking place in a stable, he claimed that it made perfect sense because Joseph and Mary’s home would have been packed full of out-of-town relatives who had returned to Bethlehem for the census. That in itself would have made it a cramped and uncomfortable for a woman about to give birth. Also, with so many people in town, there wouldn’t have been any vacancies at the inn for Mary to go and deliver her child there. Instead, they would have retreated to the stable to perform the delivery simply for reasons of privacy, and that would explain why the shepherds found Christ lying in a manger. Most homes at that time kept stables behind the houses.

The premise that the Holy Family lived in Bethlehem instead of Nazareth also explains how the Magi found them in Bethlehem after traveling for two years. It also helps to explain the Biblical account of Joseph resettling the family in Nazareth upon returning from Egypt because he was afraid to go home to Judea, where Bethlehem is located.

I have to admit, the guy's explanation makes a lot of sense, and it adds some clarity and consistency to the whole story. Admittedly, my skepticism was more time and place oriented. I never did have a problem with the core premise or the reality of the story. I was only concerned that some of the pieces to the puzzle didn't fit quite right. But now the pieces have fallen into place, and the mystery, awe, and grandeur of the message remains as priceless and timeless as always. Behold, the virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son; and they shall call his name Emmanuel.

Copyrighted © 2000 – Joseph K. Waltenbaugh

[Top of page]

December 3, 2000

Son of Clinton

Remember the old Frankenstein movies? Frankenstein, Son of Frankenstein, Bride of Frankenstein, Frankenstein meets the Mummy, etc. The list was never ending. The only thing possessing a longer life span than the monster itself was the number of sequels its name produced. And the name Frankenstein wasn’t even the name of the monster. Frankenstein was the name of the doctor who created the monster. We never did find out of the name of the poor schlep who became the monster.

The same can be said of the horror film playing today in the theatre of presidential politics; however, in this sequel we know the name of the lost soul ravaging the countryside and the Constitution—it is Al Gore. But make no mistake about it, Al Gore is not his own man; he is the creation of the evil genius Bill Clinton. Without Bill Clinton, there would be no Al Gore, and our nation and the rule-of-law would not be in jeopardy today.

Bill Clinton immortalized the statement, “It all depends on what the meaning of the word ‘is’ is.” Al Gore is now using that same technique in his challenge to the presidency where he is trying to have a judge install him as president because he couldn’t garner enough votes to get himself elected. The votes have been counted, recounted, and recounted again; but, according to Al Gore, it all depends on what the meaning of the word ‘count’ is.

Al Gore’s definition of the word ‘count’ means an Al Gore vote. If it is not an Al Gore vote, then it is a vote that has not been counted. This is a shrewd move on Gore’s part because a lot of ignorant people hear him say that votes are uncounted, and they think that he means the ballots weren’t tabulated. But the ballots and votes were tabulated—numerous times—and the tabulation determined that votes were not cast for president on many ballots. People went to the polls and decided that they didn’t like either candidate, so they didn’t vote for either one. It could almost be said that, in these instances, a negative vote was cast against each candidate.

That might be a new way of looking at all of this. If we ‘count’ every Gore vote as a vote against George W. Bush, and we ‘count’ every Bush vote as a vote against Al Gore, and then we ‘count’ every ballot that has no vote for president as a vote against both candidates, we will have ‘counted’ every vote. In this scenario, we would determine the candidate who had the most votes cast against him and award the election to the opposing candidate. But I’m afraid in that circumstance George W. Bush wins again. It seems George W. Bush wins no matter how we count the votes.

And it is that fact that drives Al Gore crazy and turns him into a monster. It also fuels his self-destructive tendencies. He just can’t believe the people were stupid enough to vote for his opponent, and now he’s going to make them pay by destroying their country and their precious little Constitution. But the villagers seem to be tiring of the havoc wreaked upon them by the monster and his selfish, adolescent behavior. They are beginning to pick up their torches and pitchforks to chase him to the windmill and bring this all to a fiery conclusion. In the image of the monster, they see his creator, and they hope that in striking down Al Gore they will also free themselves from Bill Clinton.

But wait. There in the shadows, watching at a safe distance from Capitol Hill, the recognizable evil grimace, the cold and calculating intent, the sequel to our most horrid nightmare waiting to break onto the stage and dash all our hopes and dreams. Coming to a Senate office near you--Bride of Clinton.

Copyrighted © 2000 – Joseph K. Waltenbaugh

[Top of page]

November 13, 2000

Banana Republic

It is our link to the past and our key to the future. It is the anchor of our freedom; the cement that binds our nation. It is the Constitution of the United States, and it is once again under assault by those sworn to uphold and defend it.

Bill Clinton began the assault during the impeachment debacle, and Al Gore continues the war through third-world despot tactics as he seeks to ensconce himself in power and the presidency contrary to the U.S. Constitution and the rule of law. We’ve seen it before in developing countries—election manipulation, fraudulent ballot counting, media complicity, corrupt judges. We just never expected to observe it on our shores. With Clinton and Gore there are a lot of things we never expected to see on our shores and hope never to see again.

It is obvious that the constitution and the rule of law mean nothing to Clinton and Gore despite their oaths of office. All that matters are their personal lusts for power. However, there also exists another player sworn to protect and defend the constitution. It is not congress or the judicial branch. Impeachment taught us that they’ve neither the stomach nor the inclination to fight for our freedoms. No, this player is quite formidable, and it takes seriously its oath to protect and defend the constitution. This patriotic entity is the United States military.

It is a sorry state of affairs, but it might be necessary for the U.S. military under the direction of the generals to step up to the plate and reestablish the constitution and rule of law. It took military action to establish our constitution. It may require patriots in the military to preserve it. Perhaps all it would take would be a visit to the vice-president’s residence by the Joint Chiefs of Staff to bring this presidential election to a conclusion. Al Gore seems intent on turning this nation into a banana republic, so it is only fitting that the remedy should follow suit.

Copyrighted © 2000 – Joseph K. Waltenbaugh

[Top of page]

October 20, 2000

The Ayes Have It

The "eyes" have it. In watching the third of the presidential debates, I was struck by three unspoken but telling moments. They involved nothing more than body language, specifically the eyes.

The first moment occurred at the immediate outset when the candidates were announced and they walked into the forum. As he appeared in view, George W. Bush glanced up to the left, presumably at his wife, and he winked. It was a display of confidence that needed no verbal interpretation. He is a solid, honest, down-to-earth man who knows who he is, where he's going, and what he wants to do.

The second moment also involved Mr. Bush, and it occurred at one of the many moments when Al Gore was behaving like an arrogant, pompous, blowhard. The television camera was positioned on Mr. Gore, but it also captured George Bush in the scene as he again winked, this time at a forum participant in the gallery. The wink provided insight into Mr. Bush's confidence and good nature, and it revealed a shared moment between Mr. Bush and the participant in which they both recognized Al Gore as the dishonest, unlikable buffoon that he is.

The third moment did not directly involve either candidate; it instead involved Tipper Gore. The camera would often pan up to Al Gore's wife in the gallery, and in her eyes could be seen a certain sadness as she watched her husband flailing around the stage like a drowning man grasping for life. Her eyes betrayed the fact that she already knew the election was over.

The American people have had their eyes closed for too long where Clinton and Gore are concerned, but it seems they are awakening. Even the media have been displaying some minor corrections in vision. Soon we will have the true poll results, and we will learn if America wants to set a new, straighter course led by George W. Bush. When the votes are tallied on November 7th, the answer will clearly resound--the ayes have it!

Copyrighted © 2000 – Joseph K. Waltenbaugh

[Top of page]

September 17, 2000

The Late Great Society

Lately, I’ve begun referring to Al Gore as Al BJ to focus attention on his ties to the president. No, I don’t mean the current president. I mean former President Lyndon B. Johnson.

LBJ orchestrated an expansion of the welfare state known as the Great Society that resulted in a larger government, massive budget deficits, and high taxes. Ronald Reagan lowered taxes 15 years later, and the Republican congress tamed the welfare state and eliminated the deficit after 30 years. Now Gore is proposing new, massive welfare spending and another explosion of the federal bureaucracy that dwarfs even LBJ’s Great Society.

In Gore’s proposal, he spends the federal budget and the projected tax surplus plus an additional $906 billion in unaccounted spending. That means one of two things: increased taxes or a $906 billion budget deficit. Gore already gave us the largest tax increase in history that included increased taxes on senior citizens as well as increased gasoline and telephone taxes, so raising taxes is nothing new to him. And if he gives us a new deficit, we’ll be right back where we were in 1992. What did they call it? The worst economy in the last 50 years?

George W. Bush is not proposing any deficits, tax increases, or massive government takeovers of your life. He is proposing to return control of your life to you. You will be able to invest and direct some of your social security investments. You will be able to send your kids to the schools you want. You will be able to pick your doctors and select your healthcare and prescription plans. You will be given back your money so you can spend it as you please. And you will feel secure because you know the military is restored and our national defense secrets are safe.

LBJ gave us big government, and it took 30 years to scale it back. Gore is proposing an even bigger government, and who knows how long it will dominate our lives. George W. Bush is proposing a restoration of individual freedom, and that’s something long overdue.

Copyrighted © 2000 – Joseph K. Waltenbaugh

[Top of page]

September 1, 2000

The Wheel Has Turned

Try as he might to distance himself from Bill Clinton, we will never look upon one without seeing the other. That is what Dick Cheney said of Al Gore, and every word is true. Al Gore cannot escape his ties to the corruption of Bill Clinton as well as the ineptness of the Clinton/Gore administration.

Clinton/Gore continually attack the pharmaceutical industry that researches and develops new drugs. Consequently, we suffer because new cures are left undiscovered and new medicines are not developed.

Clinton/Gore cut our military by one-third and increase deployments by 300%. Consequently, the military is too exhausted and stretched too thin to adequately defend our shores.

Clinton/Gore give away our nuclear guidance technology to communist China. Consequently, our nation is at risk of a nuclear attack from a hostile, ruthless regime.

Clinton/Gore curtail the exploration and drilling of oil in the U.S. making us dependent on foreign oil. Consequently, we pay exorbitant prices at the gas pumps and become a weak, dependent nation.

Clinton/Gore prohibit logging in our national forests. Consequently, the forests are not thinned and maintained, and one-half our country is engulfed in wildfires.

Clinton/Gore attack and attempt to destroy Microsoft. Consequently, the tech stocks crash on the stock market and drag down the blue chips causing a lot of little people to lose large amounts of their retirement pensions.

Clinton/Gore vigorously fight to stop school vouchers. Consequently, low-income minorities have no choice in education and their children remain ignorant.

Clinton/Gore increase taxes and don’t want to give back any of the surplus. Consequently, our overpaid taxes are spent on worthless programs, and we are taxed even more to finance their continuation.

Clinton/Gore do nothing in eight years to save social security and now fight efforts to fix and improve it through partial privatization. Consequently, our social security investments are in danger of being lost.

Dick Cheney said that you can’t see Gore without thinking of Clinton. You also can’t ponder a Gore administration without seeing the Clinton administration. It is likely that Bill Clinton will be indicted when he leaves office, and Gore himself is one step ahead of an indictment. To quote Cheney again, “The wheel has turned. It is time for them to go!”

Copyrighted © 2000 – Joseph K. Waltenbaugh

[Top of page]

August 20, 2000

Stupid People

Let’s talk about the economy. The economy is business. Let me repeat. The economy is business. It’s amazing how many people don’t understand that fact. Business is what the economy is all about. For the economy to flourish, business has to flourish. And for business to flourish, those leading the country have to know what business is all about.

Al Gore and Joe Lieberman know nothing about business. Nothing. Absolutely nothing. Both have spent their entire lives in elected politics. They cannot make the economy work. They cannot make the economy grow. They cannot provide an environment friendly to the economy, because they know absolutely nothing about business. When it comes to business and the economy, Al Gore and Joe Lieberman, like most Democrats, are stupid.

George Bush and Dick Cheney, on the other hand, are both successful businessmen. They know the ins and outs of business and how business affects the economy. They have both excelled in their respective business endeavors thereby benefiting their companies, their colleagues, their employees, their customers, and themselves. And in doing so, they have also benefited the American economy and the American people. And now they seek to benefit America even more by sharing their knowledge, leadership and business expertise with us so that the economy can soar to even greater heights.

In 1992 the Democrats liked to say, “It’s the economy, stupid.” Actually, it’s business, stupid. Don’t be stupid, and don’t vote for stupid people.

Copyrighted © 2000 – Joseph K. Waltenbaugh

[Top of page]

August 13, 2000

Coldhearted and Cruel

I've always viewed Democrat politicians as cold-hearted and cruel, and I’m now more convinced of it than ever. Have you seen how they’re treating Al Gore lately? It’s understood that Gore is no intellectual heavyweight. That might explain why he’s the only one who doesn’t know he’s going to lose the presidential election.

It’s both sad and embarrassing to see him bouncing around at union rallies like a schizophrenic clown at a child’s birthday party. You’d think the Democrats would have the common decency to let him in on what they already know. But, instead, they feed his delusions and allow him to stumble along in his earth tones as he desperately tries to discover his own identity.

And now the Democrats have embarked on a new strategy. They intend to lull us to sleep so we’ll snooze right through the election and not vote for George W. Bush. To accomplish this feat, they've concocted the dream ticket of Al Gore and Senator Joe Lieberman--Dull and Duller.

Joe Lieberman has been championed as the only Democrat who is capable of telling the truth. He did, after all, tell us the truth about Bill and Monica. Perhaps the party leadership is hoping he’ll also break the news to Gore that he doesn’t have a prayer of becoming president.

Although Lieberman spoke the truth about Clinton and Lewinsky, he didn’t do anything about it, and it’s unlikely he’ll do anything about enlightening Al Gore. Instead, he’ll raise Gore’s hopes and lead him like a lamb to the slaughter. Then on November 8th, Lieberman will retreat back to his job in the senate and join the rest of America in forgetting about Al Gore. Like I said, Democrat politicians are cold-hearted and cruel.

Copyrighted © 2000 – Joseph K. Waltenbaugh

[Top of page]

August 6, 2000

The Measure of a Man

I tried to shake hands with a man the other day. My father always maintained that you could tell a lot about a man from his handshake. Men are like that. We use that ritual to size each other up. And that was my intention the other day when I left my office in Pittsburgh and walked over to Station Square.

George W. Bush and Richard Cheney had chosen Pittsburgh to begin their whistle-stop campaign tour through Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan, and Indiana; and the crowd awaiting them at Station Square was massive. The energized audience was so large, I couldn’t get a glimpse of either man; but I heard the governor speak, and I saw the reaction his words elicited from the crowd.

After their speeches, Bush and Cheney retired into the train with their wives, and some in the crowd hastily left the rally to return to their jobs. I used the movement within the crowd to work my way onto the tracks and positioned myself at the rear of the train with the secret service agents and a few others who also had slipped past the barrier lines. I still don’t know why, but the secret service allowed me to remain posted behind the train. It was almost as if I had become invisible.

As the train was preparing to depart, the agents began moving everyone else back behind the barriers and away from the train, but I was left standing alone as Bush and Cheney both emerged from the train to wave goodbye. I could easily have stepped up and raised my hand toward Governor Bush, but I raised my camera instead and started taking pictures as fast as I could.

I might have lost my one and only opportunity to shake hands with the next President of the United States, but it doesn’t really matter. I don’t have to shake the hand of George W. Bush to know who and what he is—solid, honest, competent, inspiring. In other words, a winner!

Copyrighted © 2000 – Joseph K. Waltenbaugh

[Top of page]

August 1, 2000

GOP Abortion

It seems the Republican Party has changed its position on abortion. I say this because GOP leaders recently aborted the political aspirations of Governor Tom Ridge of Pennsylvania. Governor Ridge was very fond of flaunting his rogue non-conformist image when it came to bucking the pro-life views of the Republican Party, not to mention the moral teachings of the Catholic Church. But with the skilled precision of an abortionist’s suction hose, the Republican hierarchy ripped away Ridge’s dream of the vice-presidency like the arms and legs of a dismembered unborn child.

It was obvious that Ridge wanted to be George W. Bush’s vice-president. He wanted it so bad he could taste it. And he didn’t aspire to just the vice-presidency; he also had designs on the “big chair" in eight years after Bush completes two terms. But neither of those dreams will be realized simply because Ridge is too stupid, too heartless or too self-absorbed to acknowledge and revere innocent human life.

George W. Bush, likewise, desired Ridge as his running mate. He found Ridge affable, and he thought they would make a good team. But despite their personal compatibility, Bush knew that principle must prevail, so he authorized the Ridge abortion. In the end, morality and decency triumphed with the selection of Dick Cheney--a victory for the unborn and for America.

Perhaps Ridge can now empathize with an unborn child targeted for abortion--so full of promise, so full of potential, so full of dreams, yet perpetually doomed. As an unborn child vigorously grasps at life up until the moment the abortionist snuffs it out, Ridge held onto his dream of the vice-presidency until the very end. But neither the aborted child nor Governor Ridge will ever realize his dreams or his full potential.

Unlike an unborn child, Governor Ridge had a choice, and he chose to throw it all away. He once wore his pro-choice label as a badge of honor, and ironically, it was that choice that robbed him of his future. But then robbing individuals of their futures is what abortion is all about.

Copyrighted © 2000 – Joseph K. Waltenbaugh

[Top of page]

June 1, 2000

Cowards, Wimps and Weaklings

“It depends on what the meaning of the word ‘is’ is.” Now where have I heard that before? Ah, yes, those immortal words were spoken by Bill Clinton in his sworn testimony that landed him a contempt citation for perjury and got him impeached. And it now looks as though he might be disbarred over it. I bring this up again because today I read something that sounded so Clinton-esque it was creepy.

Earlier today three judges from the United States Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals issued their decision in the Elian Gonzalez case. Within two hours of the document’s release, I was on the Internet reading it. What I read scared me because parts of the decision could easily have been written by Bill Clinton.

The court affirmed that, according to 8 U.S.C. Sec. 101(a)(3) and the Immigration and Naturalization Service’s (INS) own regulations, “a six-year old is eligible to apply for asylum.” Then the court passed into that shadowy netherworld of Bill Clinton and his operatives, and they ruled that it all depends on what you mean by the word “apply.” Since the court doesn’t know what the word apply means, it decreed that it was permissible for Bill Clinton and the INS to make up the rules as they go along.

Guided by its own established procedures, the INS could have accepted Elian’s application under the “special circumstances” clause, but the court accepted INS’s contention that Elian’s case wasn’t a special circumstance. A six-year-old orphaned child rescued at sea and brought to freedom in the United States while trying to escape a totalitarian regime is not a special circumstance? No, according to the court, it is not. It’s a “peculiar circumstance.” It’s an “extraordinary circumstance.” But it’s not a “special circumstance,” and, therefore, Bill Clinton and the INS can do whatever they want.

To see these judges sink to Bill Clinton’s level of corrupting the English language is really disturbing. Of course, they’ve seen what happens to people who oppose Clinton whether they be judges or merely women who are raped or abused by Clinton. I assume they were just afraid. The judges did muster enough courage to say in footnotes that they don’t believe what Clinton and the INS did was right. But what good is that? On the whole, the judges were pretty much spineless.

There is so little courage exhibited these days. Clinton’s cowardice is widely known and well documented as is Gore’s and that of the whole Clinton administration. And now it seems this lack of courage extends even into the courts. To find any courage we have to look to the good people of the Cuban-American community and to one very brave—but doomed—Cuban child. Vaya con Dios, young Elian.

Copyrighted © 2000 – Joseph K. Waltenbaugh

[Top of page]

May 14, 2000

Common Sense Gun Control

Today in Washington D.C. they held the rally known as the Million Moms March . A few weeks ago I heard someone label the rally the PMS Parade, and, personally, I think it a more accurate description. But, nevertheless, the women have chosen their own label, and the news media are sucking it up.

The moms are claiming to be promoting common sense gun control laws. The only problem is that we already have common sense gun control laws. They just aren’t being enforced. What the moms really want is to have guns outlawed altogether.

A few months ago I had the opportunity to hear an interview with Thomas Sowell, PhD. Dr. Sowell is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institute, and he was addressing the subject of gun control. He pointed out that guns do two things: they kill people and they save lives. Dr. Sowell then explained that the question of gun control is not a question of principle, but, rather, an empirical question. Do more people die when you have gun control versus when you don’t have gun control? The answer is that more people die when you have gun control. He went on to cite the research and statistics that prove his point: more people die of gun related deaths in regions with the most stringent gun control laws.

Gun laws prevent home accidents but they also make it easier for people who have guns illegally to prey upon unarmed people and to commit more crimes. Empirically, guns prevent more deaths than they cause, because law abiding citizens with guns are able to prevent and deter crimes committed by the non-law abiding citizens. Two million crimes are prevented each year with guns.

That brings me back to the Million Moms March. I guess it was only appropriate that they chose to march in Washington D.C., a crime and murder ridden city with the most stringent gun laws in the nation. A million unarmed women complaining about guns while strolling through one of the most dangerous cities in the United States. I sure hope there were a lot of policemen there with guns to protect them.

Copyright © 2000 – Joseph K. Waltenbaugh

[Top of page]

April 23, 2000

Paradise Lost

Here is the question. How do you make a six-year-old Cuban child not want to remain in the United States? The answer is simple. Turn the United States into Cuba.

Little Elian Gonzalez knows what life is like in Cuba, and that’s why he doesn’t want to go back. He knows that in a couple years he will be taken away from his family by Castro to work as a slave in the tobacco and sugar cane fields until he reaches maturity. It happens to all the children, and he knows it will happen to him. Perhaps his father will be able to visit him one weekend a month. Perhaps not. He also knows that if his father refuses to give him up to Castro, armed soldiers will raid his house, rough up the people there, point guns at his family and him, and drag him away to an armed compound where he will be subjected to brainwashing and coercion.

So what happened on Holy Saturday? Armed Castro-type storm troopers of the United States government raided his home, roughed up a few people, pointed guns at him and his family, and dragged him away to an armed compound where he is being subjected to brainwashing and coercion. All of a sudden here is no different than there, so why should he care now where he lives?

The Clinton-Castro regime had to do what it did. It was rebuked and admonished by the United States Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals for its failure to uphold the law. The court explained in no uncertain terms that Elian Gonzalez legally had applied for asylum and is entitled to his day in court. Also, the court reiterated that the boy’s wishes in this matter are germane, and his wishes will be heard in a legal hearing. In light of that development, the Clinton-Castro regime knows it cannot allow the boy to walk into that courtroom on May 11, 2000 and say that he wants to stay in the United States, and so we witnessed the debacle that took place Holy Saturday morning.

Now that Elian is back in Castro’s custody, he will never again say that he wants to stay in the United States. He will never again say that he wants to visit Disney World. He will never again say he wants to play on his swing set with his friends or swim in his little pool or watch Barney on television or play Nintendo. Elian will never again do what he wants to do. He will never again say what he wants to say. He will never again know freedom. He will walk into that courtroom and say what he is told to say by Castro’s goons, just like his father does.

To my fellow citizens who are too deluded, ignorant or self-absorbed to understand the loss of freedom, I suggest you closely examine and remember the picture of the helmeted INS thug pointing an automatic weapon at Elian as he drags the boy from his hiding place in the closet. If you refuse to recognize the difference between freedom and a murderous, Godless, totalitarian regime, and if you continue to turn a blind eye to the loss of freedom by others, you just might see that picture coming to a home near you.

Copyright © 2000 – Joseph K. Waltenbaugh

[Top of page]

April 12, 2000

The Gore Tax

I paid my Gore tax today, and I learned that it's going up this month. Gore tax? Yeah, it’s that illegal tax you’re paying on your phone bill each month. If you use AT&T as your long distance carrier like I do, your tax is increasing to 8.6% of your long distance charges.

The Gore tax got its name from the fact that Al Gore, as vice-president, pushed for and succeeded in amending the Telecommunications Act of 1966. As a result, telephone companies must now collect an additional tax from us and deposit the money into a universal service fund administered by the federal government. The only catch is that the telephone companies cannot use the word "tax" to describe the collections. If they do, they get into big trouble with the feds.

The Federal Communications Commission ordered the telephone companies to begin collecting the “contributions” in May 1997, and in 1999 the contribution rate was raised by 73%. If you think there is something wrong with this picture, you’re right. A government agency, such as the FCC, and an executive branch flunky, such as Al Gore, cannot legally institute or raise a tax—and yet they did. According to the U.S. Constitution, only Congress has the power to tax, but the Constitution has become an outmoded document in the Clinton-Gore administration.

My AT&T bill this month includes a short explanation of the Gore tax, which it calls the Universal Connectivity Charge for the National Access Contribution. AT&T has even supplied a toll-free number (1-800-532-2021) with a recorded explanation of the tax. You must remember, however, that telephone companies are not allowed to call it a tax. Nevertheless, the folks at AT&T walk a fine line in their recorded message, and they manage to get the point across that the mandatory “contribution” is not their idea.

And so I’m left to wonder. If, as vice-president, Al Gore is able to impose an illegal tax on us and institute a prohibition against our being informed that it is a tax, just think what he could do to us as president.

Copyright © 2000 – Joseph K. Waltenbaugh

[Top of page]

April 8, 2000

Authentic Americans

It’s good to turn on the television and see some real Americans again. I had assumed a genuine appreciation of freedom had died in this country, but, lately, I’ve been catching a glimpse of it down in Miami. It’s refreshing to see, and it breathes new hope into my sometime pessimistic view of what we’ve become as a nation. The only down side is that such heroic displays in defense of freedom usually trigger some onslaught of tragedy, and I’m certain a degree of tragedy will befall those who have taken up the noble cause.

The individuals to whom I refer are the Cuban-Americans in the streets of Miami’s Little Havana who are using themselves as human shields to protect Elian Gonzalez. They are passionately, defiantly and courageously bearing witness to the evil, repressive regime that is Fidel Castro. Because they themselves have been deprived of freedom in the past, they understand what freedom truly means, and they have proclaimed their willingness to die for it here and now. Our forebears shared these same ideals, and we exist as a free, independent nation because of their beliefs and sacrifices.

Unfortunately, not many people in our country today value freedom the way the Cuban-American community does. Just look at the polls. People don’t seem to care that Bill Clinton acts like Fidel Castro, so why should they care if a young boy is condemned to live life under the repressive Castro regime?

When it comes to philosophy, there’s not much of a difference between Bill Clinton and Fidel Castro. Both use the government and military to intimidate and destroy people they don’t like and to kill those they view as enemies or deem expendable. Castro, for the most part, kills his own citizens, but Clinton seems to prefer killing citizens of other countries. Both feel they are above the law—and they’ve proven that they are—and both demand that the children of all but the elites (e.g. presidents, congressmen, etc.) endure government indoctrination. Here on our shores, we call such indoctrination the public education system.

So it’s no wonder people see nothing wrong with a communist country and its inherently evil dictator. They view Cuba no differently than the way they view this country. Fortunately, there is still a group of Americans who understand and hold dear the freedom on which our country was founded. Ironically, these authentic Americans are the ones who weren’t born here.

Copyright © 2000 – Joseph K. Waltenbaugh

[Top of page]

March 30, 2000

Papal Penance

I'm sorry. No, I mean I'm really sorry. I'm really, really, really sorry. Now that's an apology. What the pope delivered while touring the Holy Land was not an apology.

All week long on TV and in newspapers people were complaining that Pope John Paul II hadn't gone far enough in his apology to Jews for the inaction of the Catholic Church during the Holocaust. Blinded by their egos or their ignorance, these whiners completely missed the point. The pope wasn't making an apology to them; he was offering a prayer to God, a prayer in which he acknowledged the failings of the Catholic Church and asked God's pardon.

Unlike the pope, Bill Clinton likes to portray himself as a sensitive and caring guy by offering up meaningless apologies for the acts of other people. The pope, however, doesn't engage in such phony gimmicks. He does not apologize to people for things he did not do and things over which he had no control.

Unfortunately, our modern, hypersensitive society expects leaders to deliver these phony Clinton-type apologies. This mentality can also be seen in the call for an apology for slavery in America even though all the slaves and slave owners are dead and gone. It's the symbolism that counts. Someone who had nothing to do with the past is expected to stand up and say I'm sorry, and, somehow, that will make everything better.

As a Christian, perhaps I should demand an apology from Jews for their standing idly by while Nero and his Roman buddies used my forebears as lawn torches or served them to the lions as the Christian du jour. The only problem is that none of those Jews are still around, so what would be the point?

I guess all I can do then is apologize and say I'm sorry--really, really, sorry--if I've offended any Jew, slave, Roman or lion in what I have written. I'm also sorry for disease, starvation, the Great Depression, Al Gore, World War II and the Drew Cary Show. Gee, I feel better now. Don't you?

Copyright © 2000 – Joseph K. Waltenbaugh

[Top of page]

March 21, 2000

The Crying Game

It is the only profession that can boast of its own constitutional protection. Nothing is allowed to restrain it. What I'm talking about is the freedom of the press, a freedom that extends to the whole of the print and electronic news media. So with their very own constitutional protection, why are they such a bunch of crybabies?

A few weeks ago they were beside themselves because the Republicans failed to nominate the media’s Republican candidate of choice, John McCain. Night after night we were forced to endure their incredulity and moaning over the way McCain was handed his hat and shown the door by loathsome Republicans who really don’t know what’s good for them. In truth, McCain had no real support in this country—and he still has no real support—except for the news media themselves and a handful of conniving Democrats who wouldn’t have voted for him in the general election anyway. In reality, had Senator McCain garnered any real support, he would have won the Republican nomination—but he didn’t, and the news media threw a tantrum because of it.

Like most spoiled brats with short attention spans, the news media stopped their crying temporarily and became briefly distracted by Wayne LaPierre, Vice President of the NRA, when he made the observation that Bill Clinton needs a certain level of violence in this country and is willing to accept a certain amount of killing to further his own political agenda. The media’s tearful sobs were quickly replaced with angry outrage at LaPierre’s remarks about their icon, Bill Clinton. Never mind that what Mr. LaPierre said was totally accurate. Bill Clinton is willing to accept killing to further his own political agenda and protect his own self-interest. The school shootings that began during his tenure as president may or may not be his responsibility, but the refusal of his administration to enforce the existing 22,000 federal gun laws and the resulting deaths are his responsibility. He is also directly responsible for the deaths that occurred in the bombings and wars he started on three continents while trying to distract our attention from the Monica Lewinsky scandal and his own impeachment.

But then today John McCain returned to the Senate, and the news media forgot all about Wayne LaPierre, and they started crying and whining again about John McCain. They had such high hopes for him and his bogus campaign finance reform. Of course, the only reason they are interested in the McCain reform is that it will prevent the Republicans from purchasing media advertising to state their positions and get out the Republican message. That would leave the news media empowered to report whatever they wanted about a candidate without the candidate having an opportunity to respond. In essence, they would be choosing the candidates along with determining who wins the election. No wonder they like John McCain so much.

Fortunately, the news media didn’t get their Republican candidate of choice, and they’ll have to wait a little longer to secure their total control over the elections in this country. Until then, they’ll continue to act like crybabies, whining and moaning while they try to shove the McCain reform down our throats. In a strange sort of way, I kind of enjoy their pathetic whining. I can’t wait to see the really obscene tantrum they throw when George W. Bush moves into the White House.

Copyright © 2000 – Joseph K. Waltenbaugh

[Top of page]

March 12, 2000

The Usual Suspects

Al Gore’s bag lady, Maria Hsia (pronounced Shaw), was just convicted on five felony counts for aiding Al Gore in the collection of illegal Communist Chinese campaign contributions (i.e. bribes and payoffs) laundered through a Buddhist Temple in the 1996 presidential campaign. Ms. Hsia now faces prison time while Al Gore gets to run for president and say that campaign finance reform is one of his major objectives. It’s kind of like putting away one of Al Capone’s lieutenants and then installing Al Capone as head of the organized crime unit. But if Al Gore is elected president, it will be because the news media and Bill Clinton’s bag lady, Attorney General Janet Reno, have done everything in their power to protect him and Bill Clinton.

Janet Reno’s role in this came to light again last week due to the leaking of a Justice Department lead investigator’s report that was kept secret for two years by Ms. Reno. The report outlined the White House fund-raising crimes and abuses, and it called for further investigation by an independent counsel, but Janet Reno put the report under lock and key in the hope that it would never see the light of day. It did; however, it might not matter. The mainstream news media is as complicit in the crimes of Clinton and Gore as is the Attorney General. They are not about to do or say anything that will damage Al Gore’s chances of being elected president not to mention putting him in jail.

Yesterday, I watched Andrew Glass on C-SPAN’s Washington Journal. He is the senior correspondent for Cox Newspapers, and he took a phone call from a viewer who asked him how the members of the press could not be biased toward the Democrats when a survey shows that 90% of them are Democrats and voted for Clinton and Gore in the last two elections. His response was that the media get to see the candidates up close, and, therefore, they are more informed voters. Mr. Glass’ message? If you are educated and well informed, you vote for Democrats--you especially vote for Bill Clinton and Al Gore. With that kind of elitism and liberal Democrat bias coming from the senior correspondent of Cox Newspapers, does anyone really believe the media will give any kind of coverage to the crimes of Al Gore?

As for Maria Hsia, she has been convicted, but she is not yet in jail. There’s a good chance she won’t do much, if any, jail time because the sentencing judge is a Clinton appointee. Also, if Al Gore is elected president, she definitely will not be going to jail. Instead, she’ll probably get a cabinet position. The news media did not cover her trial because it would have been bad publicity for Gore, and they never expected her to be convicted. Then, when she was convicted, they had to scramble and give some light one-day coverage to the event. Now they have to work extra hard to try and keep her out of jail. And what better way to do that than to get Al Gore elected president. After all, the prisons are so overcrowded. Putting Al Gore, Bill Clinton, Maria Hsia and Janet Reno all in prison won’t do anyone any good. Or will it?

Copyright © 2000 – Joseph K. Waltenbaugh

[Top of page]

February 29, 2000

A Republican Crisis of Faith

What doth it profit a man if he should gain the whole world and suffer the loss of his soul? If you don’t know, that passage is from the Bible. I’m confidently able to make such a religious proclamation because John McCain has introduced religion into the presidential campaign. Well, he hasn’t exactly introduced religion into the campaign. What he has done is introduce religious bigotry into the campaign, and he is proving himself the biggest religious bigot of all. John McCain is trying to paint George Bush as an anti-Catholic bigot, and it’s not going to work.

I am first and foremost a Catholic. My Catholic faith is something I value greatly, and I take it very seriously, more seriously than anything else in my life. Second to being a Catholic, I’m a Republican, and in the last few weeks I’ve seen John McCain insult both my religion and my political party.

For years I’ve railed against the Democrat Party and the way it seduces and discards the Black population of our nation. The Blacks in America also share some of the blame for this because they allow themselves to be pandered to and baited by the Democrats. It happens over and over again, and they never seem to learn. The race baiting of the Democrats and the gullibility of the Blacks was never more evident than at last week’s Democrat presidential debate at the Apollo Theatre in Harlem. It was a horrible spectacle to behold. It was almost un-American.

Now I see John McCain trying to bait Catholics the way Democrats bait Blacks, and I for one refuse to be duped and seduced by him. I find it vile that McCain would revert to Clintonian tactics and attempt to use my Catholic faith to further his own self-interest and his disgraceful, dishonest campaign. I haven’t felt this rancor for a political candidate since Bill Clinton appeared on the scene in 1992. Bill Clinton only insulted my intelligence. John McCain has insulted my intelligence and my Catholic faith, and that’s not a wise thing to do.

That brings me back to the Bible passage, one that is very apropos for the Republic Party today. What does it profit us in the Republican Party if we gain the Whitehouse and suffer the loss of our integrity and our party in the process? Are we then, like the Democrats, going to have to lie and play dumb so as to excuse a dishonest Republican president who can’t be trusted and doesn’t stand for anything. I would rather see the Republican Party lose the presidency and return to fight another day than elect a Clinton wanna-be like John McCain whose only difference is that he bears a Republican moniker. If, on Election Day in November, it comes down to a choice between Clinton-lite represented by John McCain and Clinton-dumb represented by Al Gore, I think I’ll stay home. I believe a lot of Catholics and other Christians will do likewise.

Copyright (c) 2000 - Joseph K. Waltenbaugh

[Top of page]

February 19, 2000

A Dog at School

There’s a book about teaching by James Herndon called How to Survive in Your Native Land. It has a chapter entitled “A Dog at School” that chronicles the mayhem that ensues whenever a dog wanders into a classroom.

In the presence of a dog, normal, studious school children lose all control and become raving maniacs obsessed with the dog. It’s as if they’ve never seen a dog before in their lives. They immediately rush the dog, grab the dog’s ears, pull the dog’s tail, pick up the dog, drop the dog, feed the dog and do anything and everything imaginable to the dog except one thing—ignore the dog. Eventually, the teacher has to intervene, and, in the end, the doors of the school burst open, and the dog comes flying out, landing on its butt. It rises, sniffs itself and then moseys along its way.

I see Hillary Clinton’s run for the U.S. Senate seat from New York a very similar situation. She belongs in the Senate from New York about as much as a dog belongs in school, but she has wandered into New York, and the news media has flocked to her like school children infatuated with a misdirected canine. They just can’t ignore her.

She is being picked up and carried all over the state by those who act as if they’ve never seen a dog before. She is being feed New York cuisine and given a Yankee’s ball cap to wear as if those things will make her a real New Yorker. And she’s being petted and fêted by all sorts of people who delude themselves and refuse to recognize her for what she really is—a dog at school.

Come November the voters will have their say. At that point, the adults will step in and we’ll see the doors of the voting booths open wide and out will fly Hillary Clinton landing not so gracefully on her butt. At that point she’ll rise, sniff herself and then mosey along her way to Chappaqua, Illinois, Arkansas or wherever it is she really lives.

Copyright (c) 2000 - Joseph K. Waltenbaugh

[Top of page]

February 9, 2000

Slick Mickey

I’m going to do the unspeakable. I’m going to criticize the character and integrity of Senator and presidential candidate John McCain. I’m sorry; I can’t help it. Eight years ago I watched the news media glamorize Bill Clinton and gloss over the tell-tale signs of his dishonesty and lack of character, and now I see them doing the same thing for John McCain.

People are afraid to say anything negative about McCain because of his Vietnam War experience. The worst thing I’ve heard said about him is that he is a good man with bad ideas. I disagree. I don’t think he’s a good man at all, but his ideas definitely are bad.

Often you hear it said that John McCain is a war hero. No, I don’t think he’s a hero; he’s a survivor. He found himself in a hellish state of affairs as a prisoner-of-war in Vietnam, and he did what he had to do to survive. Unfortunately, the experience seems to have imprinted itself onto his character, and he has carried this whatever-it-takes attitude well beyond his P.O.W days. He easily blurs the lines between right and wrong, legal and illegal, and he will say and do just about anything to get what he wants. The pandering, distortions and outright lies of his presidential campaign are evidence of this fact. The only other candidate to outdo him in this respect is Al Gore.

Let me say one other thing about the hero label that has been affixed to John McCain. What McCain did as a Vietnam P.O.W., he did in his youth. People change, and there is no guarantee that bravery and honor demonstrated in the past will follow a man into the future. John Glenn is a good example. John Glenn is also referred to as an American hero for his youthful space flight aboard Friendship 7, but, as a senator later in life, he proved himself to be an American disgrace. The disgrace came through his shameful collusion with Bill Clinton to gum up and subvert the investigation into the Clinton-Gore solicitation of illegal campaign funds from the communist Chinese and the later nuclear weapons’ guidance technology transfers to China that now put our nation at risk. And what a coincidence that Senator Glenn and Senator McCain happen to both be members of the Keating Five, as if further proof is needed of the lack of integrity of either man.

We already elected someone who was known to be dishonest and lacking in integrity, and that person ended up being impeached as well as being held in contempt of court and fined for lying under oath. Then there’s that small matter of his starting wars and dropping bombs on people just to divert attention from his other crimes, something that mysteriously stopped as soon as impeachment hearings and the Lewinsky scandal ended. Honesty and integrity do count, and McCain’s attempt to get elected by mimicking Bill Clinton is troubling. It’s scary to see people once duped by Slick Willy again fall prey to similar tactics employed by Slick Mickey.

I don’t know where, when or how Bill Clinton lost his soul, but I think John McCain's unfortunate ordeal in the Hanoi Hilton might have played a role in his willingness to ignore ethics and honesty so as to achieve his selfish desires. It might explain his lack of integrity, but it surely doesn't excuse it.

Copyright (c) 2000 - Joseph K. Waltenbaugh

[Top of page]

February 3, 2000

Lower Taxes and Higher IQs

Let's face it. People aren't real bright. And when it comes to economic issues, they're downright stupid. That fact presents a real problem for any Republican wishing to get elected to national public office. It is said that most people vote their own self-interests, and that's probably true. When a taxpayer votes for a candidate who promises to lower taxes, he is definitely voting his own self-interest. And when a welfare recipient votes for a candidate who promises to continue giving him free money without the obligation of earning it, he also is voting his own self-interest. But there is a big economic difference between the self-interest of the welfare recipient and that of the taxpayer.

Levy a tax on an activity and that activity will decrease. Lower or remove the tax and the activity then increases. That's a basic tenet of economics, one that some people just can't seem to grasp. Ronald Reagan demonstrated that principle in the 1980s when he lowered taxes and doubled tax revenues. There was more money for the government because economic activity took off. People could keep more of their money, so they worked harder to earn more of it. Their increased earnings were taxed at the new lower rate generating more tax revenue for the government. Of course, all this new money intoxicated the Congress. Like drunken sailors, they spent all the new revenues--and a lot more besides--until they had run up a deficit. But the hard, cold, indisputable fact remains that Ronald Reagan doubled the money coming into the government by lowering the tax rates. Imagine how much money the government would have if tax revenues were doubled in our current economy. If that happened, there wouldn't be all this worry about shoring up the Social Security Trust Fund.

But let's get back to the self-interest of the welfare recipient versus that of the taxpayer. The self-interest of the welfare recipient involves raising taxes on the producers to provide more money for the welfare recipient. This stifles the economy because there is less incentive for the taxpayers--or anyone else--to work hard because they don't get to keep and enjoy the fruits of their labors. On the other hand, the self-interest of the taxpayer involves lowering taxes, and it results in more economic activity, more revenue for the government, more jobs for the unemployed, and more money for social programs for the poor and disabled. It's a winning prescription for all involved except Democrat politicians who buy the votes of the lazy and stupid with money giveaways and welfare.

The Republicans are talking about tax cuts, but it is not resonating with the pubic because the public is ignorant about economics. What Republicans should do is stop talking about "cutting taxes" and start talking about "increasing revenues through tax cuts." They should never use the words "tax cuts" except in the phrase "increasing revenues through tax cuts." It is such an alien idea to the doltish news media that it most certainly will elicit the question, "What do you mean?" This then opens the door for a brief sound-bite explanation of how tax cuts stimulate the economy and increase jobs opportunities that produce more taxpayers from whom the government can collect more money to finance its programs. It also provides the opportunity to offer up hard data and statistics from the Reagan years that effectively counter the Democrat lies about the 1980s. And if the Republicans want to sound like real compassionate conservatives, they can always talk about "increasing revenues through tax cuts to help the poor."

It's all about promoting our ideas and educating the public at the same time. Let the Democrats cultivate their garden of envy and ignorance and play to the baser side of human emotions. The Republicans need to be about enlightening the minds and building the spirit of people so the public will no longer be fooled by the deceptive ploys of the Democrats. In this way we will achieve our goals of freedom and prosperity through tax cuts and higher IQs--and we just might elect a Republican president in the process.

Copyright (c) 2000 - Joseph K. Waltenbaugh

[Top of page]