Thursday -- February 17, 2005
 CHECKING INAs is normally the case .. try to take a few days off to take care of a
little flight training and suddenly things are happening that you just can't
bear not commenting on. Last night I was watching Hannity & Colmes. They had two college students
on the air to discuss recent attacks on military recruiters who visited their
campus. These two neophyte know-it-alls were members of some young socialist
group. How cute. All Hannity wanted to do was to get them to answer one simple
question. To wit: "Is it proper to throw bottles and other objects at the
heads of military recruiters, or anyone visiting your campus?" Neither one
of these college-age children would answer the question. All the female could
say was "Well, they were warned not to come to the campus in the first
place." I don't know about you, but I've had it about up to here with these college
students who think that they know all of the answers. They haven't been out from
mommy and daddy's home for much more than one year, they've never had to apply
for a job knowing that their food, shelter, clothing and transportation depended
on getting work. Mommy and daddy are still paying most of their personal bills.
They're going to school on student loans and grants funded by the capitalistic
taxpayers they hate so much, and suddenly by virtue of the fact that they've
been admitted to a college or university somewhere they are all-wise and
all-knowing and the rest of this country should just stand back and let them
solve all of our problems and get the entire world straightened out once and for
all. I just love it when someone like Hannity gets them on the air and ask them
the questions that force them to reveal their stupidity and immaturity for all
the world to see. You can be your arse that Katie Couric would never have asked
that question of these two brats. Anyway ... I have to go plan a cross country with some instructor looking
over my shoulder ... so you people have a good day, you hear? MORE SOCIAL SECURITY TAXES
Back during his State of the Union address, President Bush stated his desire to
reform Social Security. While he did not put forth a specific proposal, he has
said he wants Congress to craft a plan that does three things: 1.) Instituted
private investment accounts for younger workers 2.) Does not cut benefits for
people 55 and older and 3.) Does not increase payroll taxes. So that's been the
template so far. He's open to anything else, including raising the retirement
age, changing the way cost of living increases are calculated, and so on.
Yesterday, speaking at an event in an airport terminal in Portsmouth, New
Hampshire, George Bush said that he would not rule out making more wages subject
to Social Security taxes. At the same time, as before, he says he would not
support increasing the payroll tax rate. So what exactly does that mean? Time
for a little math.
Under the existing system, only the first $90,000 of income is subject to the
Social Security taxes, which is 12.4%. That figure actually rises with
inflation, because last year it was $87,100. If you look at your check stub, you
won't see the full 12.4% coming out of your check because your employee
allegedly "contributes" half the Social Security taxes, but trust me,
you're paying it in the form of reduced salary. Employers aren't stupid, you
know. That's why they're rich and you work for them, and not the other way
around.
So as the theory goes, sticking it to the rich would get some Democrats on board
with Social Security reform. Here's a better idea: why not let rich people opt
out of Social Security entirely? In exchange for no big tax increase, they give
up any and all future claims to Social Security. Probably won't happen though.
There is still rampant ignorance out there that is being perpetrated by the
Democrats that a "Social Security Trust Fund" exists. Of course,
there's no such thing. The money is gone - spent. The only thing left is
trillions of dollars in I.O.U's, in the form of government securities.
So now you can add "screw the rich" to the list of possible Social
Security reforms. Feels so good to say, doesn't it? That is, until you discover
you're one of the "rich" ones.
IT'S YOUR MONEY: FARM SUBSIDIES
 Yesterday we told you about Amtrak's government handout, today it's farm
subsidies. In President Bush's $2.57 trillion budget proposal for FY 2006 (FY
stands for "fiscal year," which begins in October) he is proposing
that $94.6 billion be spent on the Department of Agriculture. That figure
includes the food stamp program (otherwise known as 'free money for not
working,') but we'll set that aside for just a minute.
The Congress passed a 10-year farm bill a couple years ago that spends $171
billion on farm subsidies. The idea behind this is to support poor family
farmers from going under. But that isn't what happens. Besides, who cares? We
live in a capitalist society. If you can't make a living in the farming
business, do something else. The Heritage Foundation points out that if
government wanted to just help out family farmers, they could bring them all up
to 185% of the poverty level for just $4 billion a year.
So under that farm bill, $20 billion gets handed out every year, mostly to large
farms and big business. It's nothing more than corporate welfare. The amount of
the handouts increase with the more crops that are grown. Of course, this
further distorts the market place, because farmers are being paid to grow that
which may not be needed. Here's an idea: how about abolishing the agriculture
department and get rid of farm subsidies entirely. Yeah, I know...dream on. Farm
states have members of Congress on both sides of the aisle that would never let
that happen.
It's too bad....we could save $20 billion a year by cutting off the corporate
welfare queens out on the prairie.
IRAN AND SYRIA JOINING FORCES
Iran and Syria said yesterday they would unite against and challenges or threats
to their nations' livelihoods. What they really were saying is that they are
going to join forces against the United States. Essentially what this does is
merge two terrorist states into one nice, big, fat, juicy target.
The two Islamic terrorist countries realize that with democracy coming into play
in Iraq, they're feeling the pinch. Plus, they know there is a president sitting
in the Oval Office for at least the next 4 years that would have no problem at
all dropping a few bombs to stomp out any nuclear ambitions for either country.
Syria is causing us problems because the insurgents in Iraq are likely being
directed by the Baathists in Damascus, and of course Iran is building nuclear
weapons. The United States and Israel will stand up to Syria and Iran, but will
the rest of the world?
Probably not. But we may have some more wars on our hands...Islamic fascism and
nukes just don't go together too well. 
Oh look, Neal has shown up in yet another fark photoshop contest.
READING ASSIGNMENTS
Ward Churchill and others like him still have jobs at universities because of
the tenure system, which has become a safe haven for people who believe they can
never be fired. Ann
Coulter has the details. Harvard
President Larry Summers continues to suffer because of his comments about
men being better at science and math than women. Now he faces a faculty
revolt. His job might not survive this. Oh well...at least you got
to be Treasury Secretary, Larry. How many people can say their signature
still adorns millions of dollars in cold, hard cash?
The director of the CIA says North
Korea continues to develop nuclear weapons and also has chemical and biological
weapons. How long are we going to tolerate this?
Many scientists don't even agree on whether global warming even exists, but
author Michael Crichton knows where it comes from. He
says aliens cause global warming. A must-read.
What is
happening to Ward Churchill is actually good news writes Richard Brookhiser,
because it shows that there are at least some checks and balances in the
academic world.
The entire Kyoto treaty is a pointless exercise that will never be fully
enacted, much less complied with. Alan
Wood, writing in The Australian, explains why. Australia, along with
the United States, is one of the few countries that didn't enact the treaty.
Media bias in the mainstream media seems to be going into overdrive of
late. As
The Media Research Center reports, Republicans are hurting the poor with tax
cuts. Same old same old.
With Howard Dean now at the helm, Democrats are back to obsessing about class
warfare. Larry
Kudlow says you can expect to hear more and more about "tax cuts for
the rich."
President Bush's budget, setting aside defense, homeland security and
entitlements, calls for a 1% "cut" in spending. Larry
Elder says in Washington, a cut usually just means lowering the increase.
But that's not stopping Democrats from howling.
Professor Mike Adams has decided to file a disability claim with his employer,
the University of North Carolina. You
can read his letter to the human resources department here. Okay, I think we've heard just about enough about (from) your hind ends.
We've got loads and loads of stories and will continue to go through them and post
our favorites here. But please, no more. We're just deleting new ones at
this point. Man's best friend rats
him out. | 
Neal Boortz's Latest Tweets