OT Rush threatens Tom!

[jeffbayson]

Yessss, CM! YES!!!! Your anger gives me strength!!! My power is growing. Soon I shall be INDESTRUCTIBLE! [quote]Originally posted by dBunny: [b]I think you're funny, el jefe. Please continue your humorous rants! :D [/b][/quote]dBynny, what in high holy crap are you talking about? I'm being serious! While I appreciate your support, it won't spare you from being razed by my hellfire when my powers become complete. Anderton, while I also appreciate your fair, just, level-headed commentary, I must say you're not helping my cause. I'm trying to do something, here: fan the flames of anger to raze the world, thereby increasing my powers and clearing the way for my world domination etc. It's very involved. See my previous post for a more detailed explanation. To flame the fires a little more: Jerry Falwell and Britney Spears are the SAME PERSON. Controlled by the Republicans from their secret underground bunker.

[Bunny Knutson]

[quote]Originally posted by C.M.: [b]You must live in that epasode of star trek when everything was backwards. :D [/b][/quote]"Everything I say is a lie." -Spock

[Wow]

[quote] Jerry Falwell and Britney Spears are the SAME PERSON. Controlled by the Republicans from their secret underground bunker. [/quote]hahahaha

[Salyphus]

The real issue as far as I'm concerned is that big money is running the show. I've yet to hear anyone argue against this point. The Dem vs. Rep stuff is just a smokescreen over the fact that they are all bought and paid for. Big money also owns the mass media. Does anyone disagree with this? The government is supposed to represent the interests of its people. Business only cares about the interests of the bottom line. When business controls government (and public perception) the public interest is not represented, and disaster will follow. Is it even necessary to provide examples of this? Polarization is a powerful tool in manipulating a populace. Think about how many ways this has been done throughout history. If we can rise above it and actually communicate perhaps there could be some hope for a saner future...

[Dogfur]

[quote]Originally posted by Jotown: [b] And if you wonder where the other voices are, just remember Bill Maher. You know why he no longer has a show dont' you?[/b][/quote]An excellent example of corporate control over media - his numbers were going up, his viewership stable, but...He said something "Politically Incorrect", a couple advertisers pulled out ( I would really like to know why, his core viewership - the demographic being advertised to - certainly weren't offended ) , and Wham! Bottom line whacks us on the head. My guess is he was made an "example" of. It was obviously effective.

[Wow]

Damn Sal , we agree on this. wooohoooo!

[Wow]

What he said was true also.

[Bunny Knutson]

[quote]Originally posted by C.M.: [b]What he said was true also.[/b][/quote]Damn, CM, there's a lot of agreement going on in this thread. I agree with that, also. ~~~ Sal, nice post, brutha! Really nice post. :thu:

[Wow]

This is getting scary. Is it a full moon or something?

[RM]

I really can't blame Tom, he's been set upon because it seems, most talking headed radio, is on the middle to far right... He choses to follow the same gambit, holding up judges, exactly as Lott did in his previous tenure...but that's not sacred, because it's not republician, so the personalities, throw meat around him to see if they can get the masses to chew him up along with the carrion... The issue really goes to the heart of being empowered, as perfomers leaders etc go, the response to ones acts, words are part of the whole... IT's why I am wary of lyrics, they also have an effect, implant visions and images of and in the minds of those who absorb... The diatribes of politicos, are feeding their comfort and need...likes crack for the politically affluent or disenfranchised...as effluent...and they eat it up... I persianlly, feel, the idiots like Frank, who saddled up their frontier outer guards, with the stinkin warlords...let the fucking bastard get away... and Daschle is about the only one who..heaven forbid, called Dub Yay Hoo on it... The premise, was a misinformed CIA on the ground synopsis, which was patently paid for and severly overvalued as real time data, just to get something started...which gave our bleating public the impression, we could trust these asshole opium growers...to do waht was right... WE could have sent the rabid, dog assed, hard on spolin for piece of arab ass, marines, who were offshore, and had them stay in the escape passes and gullies, but no...that may cause too many bodies to come home before the mid term election...what a farce What fucking morons... I really can't fault Daschle for calling them on it... IT's about time someone asked why the fuck we didn't sieze the high ground when we were in the position to do so. What makes one think, that because the CIA was travelling around with 3Million cash, that Bin Laden didin't have a stash of that and more to buy his fucking way out of harms way.... Now, we don't have a way to get him, without invading Pakistan... Great moves by Franks and Bush...they are poster boys for what if's... Rob

[whitefang]

Here's a good one for the "war" on terrorism... In Leonard Pitts Jr.'s column today, he brought up the fact that right after the 9/11 attacks, there was a call put out for the need to have Arabic speaking people enlisted in the armed forces. Seemed like a good idea. Because this plea went out across the bottom of the news reports(in those moving bands), the armed forces shortage of Arabic speaking personel needed important addressing. But, Pitts points out, Al Qaeda must not be THAT much of a concern to the military, as it booted out several of these "much needed" Arabic speaking people when it was discovered they were GAY! This fact seemed scarier to the military than ANY biological weapons used by the Taliban, or any nuclear weapons developed by North Korea, as several other homosexuals fluent in Korean were ALSO dismissed. Some people better get their priorities in order! Whitefang

[Wow]

Whitefang, [quote] But, Pitts points out, Al Qaeda must not be THAT much of a concern to the military, as it booted out several of these "much needed" Arabic speaking people when it was discovered they were GAY! This fact seemed scarier to the military than ANY biological weapons used by the Taliban, or any nuclear weapons developed by North Korea, as several other homosexuals fluent in Korean were ALSO dismissed [/quote]I never heard this before but if this is true then what the hell? Thats crazy.

[Salyphus]

Well, in addition to Big Money, there is another group that has a huge influence over our government: Christian Fundamentalists. One of the scariest things about these people, IMO, is that they actually WANT to see a huge war in the Middle East since they think this is a precursor to 'Judgement Day', when they will all fly on up to heaven :eek: This is also why they are so hip on getting involved with Israel and making sure the Jews are are in the 'holy land'; it isn't 'goodwill' but rather another precondition for the Judgement Day scenario. I didn't make this stuff up folks. There is even a series of books fantasizing about this doomsday scenario called 'Left Behind' which is apparently really popular right now... I would say there seems to be much progress being made toward this (as I call it) Crusade to Armageddon™ These are some of the things in life that truly scare me.

[Wow]

I talk about politics but I draw the line at religion. My hangup, not a shot at anyone.

[Wow]

I just saw the clip of Tom Daschile and he said" When I was called an obstructionist, the death threats on my family went way up", and behind him is a chart he had made up and the title of the chart is "Republican obstruction". I am not making this up folks. What a damn Hipacrite(sp). The dems are going down in flames. I am not saying that they will not be back but damn , let some of the younger guys have a shot, what about Harold ford from Tennessee ? ps: I know Harold Ford is in the house and Daschile is in the Senate.

[Bunny Knutson]

[quote]Originally posted by C.M.: [b]Whitefang, [quote] But, Pitts points out, Al Qaeda must not be THAT much of a concern to the military, as it booted out several of these "much needed" Arabic speaking people when it was discovered they were GAY! This fact seemed scarier to the military than ANY biological weapons used by the Taliban, or any nuclear weapons developed by North Korea, as several other homosexuals fluent in Korean were ALSO dismissed [/quote]I never heard this before but if this is true then what the hell? Thats crazy.[/b][/quote]It is very true and very scary. [url=http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A55246-2002Nov14.html]Here is the link. Click here.[/url]

[Wow]

Damn bunny, we registered at the same time and you have double the post I do. I spend WAY WAY to much time in this forum , but you, get a life. :D

[Bunny Knutson]

:D I'm trying my hardest to get into Tedster's "Get-A-Life" Club. Like him, I post a lot at work! :D

[Wow]

I figured you did it at work. I am trying to get hooked up at work to. When I do, you guys look out, it's conservative balls to the wall. :D

[Bunny Knutson]

Funny thing about posting at work is you have to compress eight hours of work into a very efficient five hour block, so you can spend the other three hours on the SSS board. :D

[Dogfur]

Or happen to be in the office on Saturday! :D

[Philip OKeefe]

[quote]Originally posted by alphajerk: [b]ideology? you got to be kidding me... politicians have no ideology, they think what they are PAID to think.[/b][/quote]DING! DING! DING! Correct answer - give that man a cigar! (or, knowing AJ, maybe a "fattie" ;) ) I'd say this is probably correct in the vast majority of cases... the trick is finding the rare ones who, irregardless of political position or party, have heartfelt convictions and principles - IOW, "honorable" politicians... er, well, on second thought, maybe that's a insurmountable oxymoron! :D

[Jotown]

[quote]Originally posted by Coaster (dave): [b]UHH, because he is an IDIOT and his show lacked ANYthing worthy of ANYone watching? thats the problem. you can cry about what the government should do and how everyone should give to this and that, but it all fizzles out because there is NO substance. if ya talk, and ya aint saying anything with information and evidence to back it up, yer a liberal![/b][/quote]Just for the record Bill Maher was not canceled because of a lack of viewers. He was holding his time slot so obviously a lot of people were watching him. I didn't always agree with him, but he was the only altrenative voice on television. Being a lone voice out there takes courage. Sounds to me like [quote]ya aint saying anything with information and evidence to back it up, [/quote]so I assumm that you are one of those damn liberals everybodys talking about. :D

[Dan South]

[quote]Originally posted by C.M.: [b]I just saw the clip of Tom Daschile and he said" When I was called an obstructionist, the death threats on my family went way up", and behind him is a chart he had made up and the title of the chart is "Republican obstruction". I am not making this up folks. What a damn Hipacrite(sp). The dems are going down in flames. I am not saying that they will not be back but damn , let some of the younger guys have a shot, what about Harold ford from Tennessee ? ps: I know Harold Ford is in the house and Daschile is in the Senate.[/b][/quote]Perhaps the editors of your newspaper have taken some creative liberties. Here's how CNN reported the story. [quote]From CNN "When I was [b]accused of being[/b] an obstructionist, there was a corresponding, a very significant increase in the number of issues that my family and I had to deal with. And I worry about that," said Daschle, whose office last year received an anthrax-laced letter. [/quote]Is there any place in civilized society, and specifically in the political system of a civilized society, for personal threats against politicians and their families? Is there any place for [i]agents provocateurs[/i] who foment violence and hatred in the masses?

[Wow]

Check some of these sites out if you want to further your political I.Q. . Lord knows you libs need all of the help you can get. :D [url=http://www.archives.gov/]national archives[/url] [url=http://www.supremecourtus.gov/]supreme court[/url] [url=http://www.loc.gov/]library of congress[/url] [url=http://www.senate.gov/index.htm]senate[/url]

[Jotown]

I found this link, and I think it might be a great place for arrogant, condescending and self-righteous people to learn more about the truth. [url=http://www.idiot.com/]Conservative Think Tank Homepage.[/url]

[Wow]

I post some legit sites to learn about politics and you get touchy and post a link to something about idiots. We see that you really don't care to solve anything, you just want to raise the level of rhetoric. Well, I can play that silly game. LIBS have no morals and all they care about are propitiating there own career and bringing down our country as we have known it for 200 years. If you want to be a liberal/socialist/communist then move to a country that really wants this stuff. Is this the type of talk you want, or can we get back to a decent conversation.

[GZsound]

I still find it interesting that the truth is such a subjective goal. I was watching the cable news about the upcoming vote on the homeland security bill. MSNBC was reporting that there was a provision that allowed a lawsuit against some big drug company to be dropped even though four or five children had been killed by the drug. Fox was reporting the provision in the bill was to protect drug companies that make antidotes to bacterial warfare agents from being sued if some people die from the serum. Now what is the truth about the validity of the provision in the bill? With this current setback for the liberal agenda, the mainstream media is starting to get shrill. If you want to find conservative bashing at it's best, check out FAIR.com or salon.com. Better yet, watch Donahue..quick before he gets cancelled. I watch Fox news because they have Geraldo, Gretta Van Susteran, Jaun Williams and other very liberal talking heads to provide balance. Find the same balance on NPR, ABC, NBC, CBS, MSNBC, etc. And hate Rush Limbaugh if you want..he has a standing bet for a million dollars if you can prove him wrong. Never been collected. Of course it's not the liberal way to put their own money where their mouths are.... Just MHO from another child starving, old folk-throwing-down-the-stairs, big corporation-loving, racist, environmental destroying, support the rich, bring back slavery, anti-union, anti-lawyer, anti-ACLU, cut all the trees and kill all the fish conservative...

[Jotown]

With all due respect CM. I have read many of your political posts. Just like the last one, you usually insult anyone who disagrees with you and your conservative republican view. Than you brandish them as “liberals”. And you actually are now saying that your insults are sincere attempts at civility and meant to be helpful. Someone who would do that would qualify as arrogant, condescending and self-righteous. Probably delusional as well. It gets rather tiring.

[Wow]

The Democrats have begun their campaign to frighten voters before the fall elections. It's nothing but a replay of past elections, the only difference being that they seem to be starting the scare tactics a bit early this year. I guess you can't blame them. Nothing else has worked. The tried to hand the Florida election problems on Bush. No go. Then it was the economy, and that didn't work either. They gave a stab at the "Bush is stupid" routine, but Americans aren't buying it. Enron looked worse for Clinton than it did for Republicans, so the Social Democrats had to give up on that one too. So, it's time to go back to Democratic roots. Try to scare the beejezus out of older voters. It's worked in the past -- so it will surely work this time. The ploy is simple. Convince wrinkled citizens that the evil Republicans want to take away their Social Security. It's an old trick, tried and true. The Democrats roll this one out every single election. This time the point men are Richard Gephardt and Terry McAuliffe. They're both telling voters that the evil Republicans have a "secret" plan to reduce Social Security benefits as soon as they are reelected. So .. now that the Democrats have opened this whole “secret plan” idea – what about the secret plans of the Democratic Socialists? Just what legislative agenda does the Democrat Party plan to pursue if and when they gain control of the Senate, the House and the presidency? Well, your Talkmaster has been watching these socialists for years, and taking notes. Here are just some of the goodies the Social Democrat Party has in store for the people of America. Remove a majority of voters from responsibility for income taxes This is the biggie – and they've made no attempt to hide their goals here. The Democrats have been working on this plan for decades --- with no small amount of help from the cowardly Republicans. The idea is simple. Using “refundable” tax credits and deductions and such ideas as the fraudulent Earned Income Tax Credit the Democrats are working to shift the entire burden for the payment of federal income taxes onto a minority of US taxpayers. Right now the top 50 percent of taxpayers pay almost 96 percent of the taxes. The Democrats are close to their goal. When the majority of voters have no federal income tax liability it will be almost impossible to pass any meaningful tax cuts – and further tax increases will be a piece of cake, especially if the taxes only affect those to be considered to be rich. Through this ploy the Democrats plan to create a defeat-proof socialist congress. Shift Social Security and Medicare Taxes to the "Rich" Payroll taxes, as you know, are basically Social Security and Medicare taxes. The Democrats have almost achieved their goal of shielding the so-called "poor" from any income tax liability at all. But --- the poor saps still have to pay Social Security and Medicare taxes. Democrats conveniently ignore the fact that these same people will get full Social Security and Medicare benefits when they reach the magic age ... and those benefits must never be touched! It's OK, though, to excuse these people from the responsibility of actually having to pay the premiums for these insurance and retirement benefits. So ..... the next element of the Democrats' Secret Plan! The elimination of payroll taxes for the poor! This is a plan that was put forth by Democrat Robert Reich on the Cutie-Pie and Holmes show on Fox News Channel on July 31, 2002. The idea is to, as Reich puts it, "lift the tax burden off the poor" by eliminating payroll taxes on the first $15,000 of income. Here's how you do it. The Democrats pass a law which says that nobody has to pay any payroll taxes on the first $15,000 of their income. Bingo -- the poor now have a completely free ride! They are now life-long, dedicated Democratic voters. But wait! Isn't that going to cost the government money? Are you kidding? Of course it's not! It's not going to cost the government money because they're simply going to raise the salary cap for Social Security taxes by enough to cover the lost revenues! Right now the cap is around $88,000 on Social Security taxes. To cover the shortfall Reich says they will just raise the salary cap by $15,000 ... to $103,000 a hear. Reich forgets, though, that there is no cap on Medicare taxes, so raising the cap by $15,000 would not recover the Medicare taxes lost by excluding the first $15,000 in income. In reality the Democrats would have to raise the salary cap by about $19,000. They would just round it off to $20,000. So, there you go. Shifting the burden for the cost of Social Security and Medicare for low income earners onto high income earners. The Democratic way. Massive increase in Social Security taxes As we've said, Social Security is a mainstay when it comes to Democrat vote-buying. Social Security was, is and always will be nothing more than a giant income redistribution scheme designed to create dependency on government and loyalty to the program's protectors in congress. The more money you pour into Social Security benefits, the more the wizened class loves you, depends on you and will be dedicated to keeping you in office. The Democrats need massive new funding sources to pay expanded Social Security benefits --- but they must get that money without raising Social Security taxes on the middle and lower income groups. The solution? The Democrats have a “secret plan” to expand the wage base for Social Security taxes. Right now you only pay these taxes on the first $88,000 or so of income. Give the Democrats the power and watch that wage base jump to $100,000, $200,000 and beyond. The eventual Democrat Party goal is to have people pay Social Security taxes on every penny they earn … no matter how much that is. There will no comparable increase in benefits for the high income earners. The extra money will be used to keep the Democratic middle and low-income constituency happy. End the home mortgage interest deduction Democrats have been after this income tax deduction for decades. They call it a "subsidy." Now the more intelligent among us will clearly understand that allowing someone to keep more of the money that they earn can hardly be called a "subsidy." But we're talking about the more intelligent among us. These people aren't likely to be voting for Democrats anyway! As soon as the Democrats manage to gain control of the federal government they will move to eliminate this "subsidy for the rich." They know that there will be little adverse political fallout. After all -- the mortgage interest deduction is only valuable to people who actually pay income taxes AND who itemize their deductions. Democrats have already succeeded in removing most of their core constituency from the income tax rolls --- so what is there to lose? When the Democrats ride into power you had better be prepared to kiss that mortgage interest deduction -- and a lot more of your money -- a fond farewell. Socialized Medicine They already tried this will Hillary Care. It failed. Democrats aren't discouraged by failure. They just try and try again until they finally get you to swallow the poison pill. There are two basic reasons the Democrats are working so hard for complete government control of this huge segment of our economy. One, of course, is power. Health care comprises about 15% of our national economy. If the government can seize control of this large a segment of our economy a giant step toward a socialist economy will have been achieved. The second reason is control. Think about it. If you control a person's access to healthcare … you effectively control that person. Right now the Democrats have had to put their plans for socialized medicine on hold. Those pesky Republicans in the House and the White House are making things tough. Democrats have to be satisfied with just sitting up there in the Beltway blocking any efforts to introduce competition into the medical marketplace. Democrats live in quaking fear of free market competition. This was one of the reasons they worked so hard to defeat Bush's economic stimulus plan. There was a provision in that plan that would allow laid-off workers to go out into the marketplace to find health insurance. They would then be allowed a tax credit to cover the cost of that health insurance premium. Democrats wanted federal funds to be paid to employers to encourage employers to extend health insurance benefits to laid-off workers. Democrats knew that if private individuals ventured into the free marketplace to find health insurance they might just find that free market competition could deliver a superior insurance product at a reduced price. Tax your pension funds This idea first received serious consideration in the early Clintonista years. As soon as the Republicans took control of the Congress the idea disappeared. Right now it's being “secretly” incubated by Democrats to be hatched when they regain control. The idea is simple. There are trillions of dollars out there in various private pension and 401K plans. All of these trillions of dollars are earning interest for (gasp!) private investors and individuals and not for the government! To make matters worse – most of these private pension and 401K plans are owned by the evil, hated upper income earners. The “secret” plan? A one-time 15% tax on the outstanding balance of all private pension and 401K retirement plans. This money would be paid into the general fund of the federal government and used to fund various social programs for low and middle-income earners. Is this a dangerous plan for Democrats? Not really. The plan would take money chiefly from those who earn enough money to actually pay income taxes and contribute to pension plans. These people do not make up the core of Democratic voters. Tax your pension contributions also After the Democrats levy their 15% tax on the outstanding balance of all pension and 401K plans, they intend to follow up with a tax on all future contributions to these plans. The theory is that “rich” people shouldn't be allowed to contribute that money to these plans tax free when “poor” people don't have that opportunity. The Magic of Imputed Income Imputed? What does "imputed" mean? One definition is to “credit.” So, by imputed income, we mean that you are credited with income you didn't necessarily earn. The goal is clear. Democrats want to milk the high-achievers for as much money as they possibly can. There are really only two ways Democrats can get more income tax out of you. One way is to raise the tax rates. At some point this is going to prove to be politically risky. So, how else can they bleed you for more? Even Democrats who have been to government schools can do simple math. They know they can get more money out of you if that line on your income tax return that reads “taxable income” can be increased. Forty percent of $120,000 is more than 40% of $90,000. All you have to do is impute – credit – more income to the poor taxpaying high-achiever. So --- here is the idea that the Clinton Administration was tossing around prior to the voter revolution of 1994. They were going to impute – credit – extra income to people who own their own homes. This was going to be done for two reasons. First, to push more people into the higher income brackets where Clinton tax increases could reach them. Second, to increase the amount of taxes actually collected from these people. Here's how Clinton's imputed income scheme was going to work: Let's say you own a home worth $250,000. Your payments on that home are about $2,000 a month. The government uses census data (there is a reason they ask all of those extra questions) to figure out what a $250,000 home in your neighborhood would rent for. Let's say it would rent for $3000 a month. This means that you could rent your home for $1000 a month more than your payments. But you're not renting your home, you're living in it. You must know that this just isn't fair to people who have to rent homes. They don't get the tax deductions you get. They don't own their own homes because, unlike you, they haven't, as Dickie Gephardt likes to phrase it, “won life's lottery.” Well .. since you're so rich and since you own your own home, the Democrats would really like to get a little more money from you to spend on those poor renters and people who aren't as “fortunate” as you are. This would all be in exchange of their votes, of course. So … here is this element of the Democrats' secret plan for you and your bank account. When you fill out your tax return you will have to consult certain tables and government data to determine what a home like yours would rent for in your neighborhood. Using the example above, your home would rent for $3000. You're paying $2000 a month to your mortgage company. You will be instructed to take the difference ($1000 a month) and multiply it by 12. This gives you $12,000. That's your imputed income. Add that to your other earnings to come up with your taxable income. That adds up to more than $4,500 in additional income taxes if you're in the top tax bracket. Hey, it's only fair ... you being rich and all. Don't gripe. This is all for those needed government programs for the “less fortunate.” By the way --- you should know that there is an imputed income bill in the Congress. It's about child support, not home mortgages. If you're a deadbeat dad who owes back child support you would, under this law, have to add the amount of your arrearage to your taxable income and pay taxes on it. Fact is, you've already paid taxes on this income once. The bill would just punish you for not forking it over to the ex wife by making you pay tax on it a second time. Today, child support. Tomorrow, that money you could be making if you would only rent your home instead of live in it. Economically Targeted Investments -- controlling your pension fund investments. Here we are, right back at your pension funds and 401K funds again. Again --- there is so much money in these funds, trillions of dollars, that the Democrats just can't leave them alone. All of this money just sitting there and not one penny of it is being used to buy votes for Democrats. So --- here comes the idea of Economically Targeted Investments. "ETIs" the Democrats call them, and they're a huge part of the Democrat "secret" agenda. All they need is control in Washington. Here's the deal. The government grants various tax breaks to these retirement plans. As you know, or as you should know, tax breaks are usually granted to force some individual or corporation to act and behave in some manner pleasing to government. The Democrats plan to change the rules on pension and 401K accounts. Instead of just investing these funds in stocks and bonds, fund managers will be required by the government to invest these funds in certain investments dictated by government -- by Democrats. In this way the governments can fund some of their spending schemes, but without using government funds. The Democrats will simply pass laws requiring fund managers to invest in corporations building low income housing; or companies who are hiring workers off welfare roles. Other "allowed" investments will be in such things as environmental protection, waste recycling and other causes popular with the left. In short order the Democrats will have rules in place which state that these pension funds cannot be invested in companies that are "unfriendly" to unions. To a Democrat ... any company with a non-union workforce is "unfriendly" to unions. Corporations who have affirmative action programs will get the not. Companies who hire and promote on merit will not. All of this will mean that the Democrats can claim credit for spending on some of their favorite programs without going to the taxpayers. They can just, in effect, use pension money. The end result, of course, is lower returns on pension fund investments -- and lower pension benefits to retirees. That doesn't bother the Democrats, though. The less money you have to retire on the more dependent on government you will be. Force employers to pay for “family leave.” Right now the Family Leave Act requires employers to give employees about 12 weeks of unpaid “family leave” to take care of certain family events and emergencies, such as having a baby, illness, death or some other situation. The key here is that the family leave is unpaid. The Democrats want employers to continue to pay the employees while they take their extended vacation. The Democrats “secret” plan is to begin with a law requiring payment of about one-half of the employee's salary. This will give Democratic candidates the opportunity to campaign in future years on the basis of increasing the percentage paid to those on family leave. Paying people for not working --- a Democrat staple. Seizure of property of those who flee Democratic tyranny As Democrats work diligently for more control over our economy and increase levels of income redistribution many high-achieving Americans are making plans to run. The greater the confiscation of wealth becomes the more people start looking for other countries in which to base their businesses. Democrats have a “secret plan” to impose confiscatory taxes on any Americans who try to move their wealth or their business interests out of this country. Government paid childcare for majority of voters The absolute last thing a Democrat would ever do would be to suggest to anyone that they shouldn't have a baby they can't afford to raise. Democrats know that children are the absolute more important thing in the lives of millions of Americans. They have been working for decades to impose ever more expensive rules and regulations on private child care agencies. They have also been working to raise taxes to the point that it is difficult beyond reason to raise a child on the income of one working parent. Thus … the necessity of child care. If the government steps in and provides the funds for that child care then, to that extent, the parents become just that much more dependent on government … and Democrats. Government control of all childhood education (indoctrination) Democrats are the party of big government. Democrats are more than thrilled with the increased propensity of many Americans to look to government for the solution to virtually all problems they face in their daily lives. Democrats know that to teach people that they can expect the government to be there to solve all of their problems you have to start with the children. Catholic schools can be expected to teach their students that Catholicism is good. Jewish private schools are going to sing the praises of Judaism. Christian schools will teach the children that Jesus is really cool. Government schools? Government schools will promote what? Government! Thus, Democrats see a clear need to keep as many children in government education programs as possible. The “secret” plan? Continue to work against any ideas that would make it easier for parents to remove their children from government schools. This means working against such ideas as vouchers or tax credits to help parents afford the cost of private schools. They will also work to add increased regulations to parents who make the decision to home school their children. Government imposed limits on executive income This one is really going to have to wait until Democrats have a solid control of the federal machine. The Social Democrat party has plans to institute limits on executive compensation. The idea is to impose confiscatory corporate income taxes on companies who pay their top executives more than X-times the compensation paid to the lowest-paid employees. Repealing the Second Amendment Haven't you ever thought it a bit odd that leftists and Democrats are generally opposed to the concept of the private ownership of firearms, while conservatives and libertarians favor the idea? Well, there's a reason. Those who value and celebrate the worth of the individual and of individual freedom generally believe that the individual should be permitted to own and bear arms. Those who put the power of government over and above the power of the individual would just as soon see the individual unarmed. Armed individuals are, of course, a threat to tyranny. Destroy talk radio Democrats aren't fond of talk radio. They know that Rush Limbaugh played a huge role in the voter revolution of 1994. Leftists realize that almost all successful talk radio shows are hosted by people who do not share their political views. They will try to neutralize talk radio through regulation. Since Democrats love the "fair" word so much, they'll try to resurrect something called the "Fairness Doctrine." How would this law work? Well, for example, a talk show host would not be allowed to voice opposition to a particular Democrat goal without finding some Democrat to go on the air to defend that goal. Talk radio soared in listenership and popularity following the death of the Fairness Doctrine. Democrats know that talk radio can once again be pushed into the radio background with new regulations that stifle conservative and libertarian voices. Give them the power -- and it's time for me to retire. You should be aware that at a recent meeting of the Democratic Party of Oregon a resolution was adopted to use the power of government and the "fairness doctrine" to reign in those horrible right wing talk show hosts.