There's Backwards and there's . . .

BurkeWords

Monday, October 20, 1997

With everything else going on out there, why in the world would I start a column off talking about Sports Utility Vehicles? Because that's the category that includes mini-vans, the favored mode of transportation among the so-called "soccer moms". (Not that "soccer moms" wish to be so-called that.)

I will preface this by saying that I neither drive nor own a mini-van, but if I didn't have to drive as much as I currently do, then having one might not be as far-fetched an idea as it seems.

My reason for picking this topic is because it typifies over-regulation and anti-children tactics, not to mention plain stupidity and ignorance of such things as cause-and-effect.

Look at all the regulations regarding children in a vehicle. Everyone agrees that the best place for a child is in the back seat. But what about a parent driving alone with an infant? If the infant is in trouble -- say he vomits or just starts crying -- the parent is helpless to do anything except to pull over to the side of the road, shut off the engine and take care of the situation. Had the baby been right next to the parent, she could have either soothed the baby or decided by looking at the baby close up whether or not the situation required stopping. (Hey, if the kid already threw up, there isn't much you can do about it . . . )

This, of course, is impossible in the days of mandated passenger-side airbags that can't be disabled when a rear-facing infant needs to be placed in that seat. Worse, now that the child must be in the back, the parent cannot see the baby if there is a problem.

I guess I should be lucky that forward-facing rear-window mounted mirrors aren't required for cars with infants. Maybe a required back-seat passenger will be regulated next.

How does this tie in with mini-vans? Glad you asked. After the infant grows a little, she'll still need a car seat. If a little brother comes along, he'll need a seat, too. That's it, your back seat is full. Cars with room for three in the back cannot hold three car seats, and a passenger next to two car seats will be extremely cramped.

So what happens when Mom has triplets or just three kids under 5? What if her kids' litle cousins stay over? It's not an unusual situation. You suddenly find yourself buying a minivan because you need the room and the safety.

But mini-vans are under attack from all sides (unsafe, too big, lousy gas-mileage, evasion of gas regulation becuase they're classifed as light trucks, etc.), and if they manage to stop families from buying them, what will they have left? How will they get anywhere? Reuqire both Mom and Dad to own and drive cars?

End of this rant.

The President has the line-item veto, and he isn't afraid to use it.

BULL!

The man is a total chicken, cowering in fear of using it for what it was designed -- to get rid of the pork tucked away inside bills like the excess fat in a pair of jogging shorts. Sure, when the defense budget reached the President's desk, he vetoed numerous items. They totalled less than one percent of the budget. I guess we should be thankful that Congress fears his veto power so much that they only included 1 per cent pork in the bill.

If only that were so. The two biggest offenders? Newt Gingrich and Trent Lott, of course. (No dig at Republicans in particular. Let's face it, Gephardt would be salivating to do the same thing if he had the gavel in his hands. Guess what, Dick, aint gonna happen any time soon.)

Old Bill is afraid to anger the GOP leadership at the moment because he needs their help to get "fast-track" authority. And Lott needs to give the military more hardware than they need or even want. Doesn't matter, as long as he brings home the bacon to his district.

Mr. President, give it up. You won't get enough of your own party on board.

A Rare Word Defending the President: You won't see too many of these. The line-item veto has its limits. If the budget says "Forty-six thousand widgets", the President can't scribble in, "No, only twenty-three thousand widgets". It's all or nothing. So if a Congressman wants a fourth destroyer built when only three are requested, the President would have to kill all four, even if he wanted the first three.

That said, I think the President should have vetoed all four. He's got the press in his corner and would have easily won this P.R. battle.

Yes, that's right. Albert "I am a Tree" Gore has declared war on Mother Nature and her wayward child, El Nino. And make no mistake about it, they will win. Chuckle, chortle, snort!

Why do I get these images of Al Gore standing on a ledge, looking like Charlton Heston as Moses, waving his staff around, commanding the elements to obey him. That's silly -- Heston is a Republican. Besides, I doubt Gore would invoke any sort of deity in his official government capacity.

Mr. Vice President, face facts: You can go door-to-door selling flood insurance, but all you will accomplish is a lessening of the pain after the storms and floods hit. Childhood homes and momentos will still be washed away and destroyed, and you can't do anything to stop it.

Or are you just planning to take credit when they don't hit?

Excuse me a moment. The heading just conjured up some interesting images in my head . . . Okay, better.

First thoughts: Should we remind this V.P. that he is talking about a TV character and not a real person? Should we berate him constantly and continually for it?

Actually, I find it more amusing that V.P. Albert Gore praised Hollywood for Oscar from Sesame Street, Archie Bunker from All in the Family and Ellen (from Ellen, naturally). I guess he wanted to get a grouchy theme going.

Last week, while in South America, the President's limo was pelted with manure from protestors. According the Mike McCurry: "His only reaction was: I've had a lot worse throw at me recently."

Gee, And I thought all those lamp-throwing stories were just nasty anti-Hillary rumors.

Marlin Fitzwater recently had this to say about Clinton's world travels: "In 1992, President Clinton was critical of President Bush's travel. But then, in 1992, he thought independent counsels were a wonderful thing."

Another about-face for President Clinton. And to think, it was a year ago I wrote that if President Clinton were a beer, he'd be a Busch Lite.

Just to show you that some Canadians have a great sense of humor, one of the new names bandied about for the new territory to be formed in 1999 when the Northwest Territories are split into two is "Bob, Canada". One print shop in Yellowknife sold nearly 1000 "Bob, Canada" T-shirts after a grassroots campaign tried to get it on the ballot.

And to show you that some Canadians don't have a great sense of humor, "Bob" was officially knocked off the ballot.

This week's opinions are noticeably shorter than last week's because of time and work constraints not because of a lack of material. In fact, I had too much to sift through. I'll be back in full swing next week.

By the way, I'm still taking email at cjburke@io.com