The Supreme Court loves to create their own interpretations of the Constitution of the United States. Especially when they "interpret" the Second Amendment. The 5th Amendment is as clear as blue sky, it makes NO exceptions. Once you make one exception you start going down the slippery slope. Next thing you know we have a Patriot Act where you are safe from unreasonable searches and seizures, EXCEPT for anti-terror cases. I'm not sure why the Supreme Court would make an exception for taxation, except that a gang of elites is running this country and have no regard for basic human rights. Just because the Supreme Court said it's ok to do something it doesn't mean it's the right thing to do.
And I understand that the Supreme Court is the law of the land, but the reality is that unfortunately the Supreme Court has ignored the Constitution on multiple occasions.
At least one of the things the Constitution stands for is an income tax.
This is certainly debatable, but I will not get into this. The fact of the matter is that the IRS uses unconstitutional means to collect taxes, forcing people to sign 1040's is certainly a big one. Another one is the unreasonable expectation on their part that 100% of my income is a profit (ok, 100% minus standard deduction which is some ridiculously low number) thus putting me as an individual earner at disadvantage compared to business owners who can deduct all kinds of expenses. I have many expenses while working as an employee: I pay for health insurance, gas expenses, food while at work, computer purchases at home, internet access at home, phone, software, job site membership fees, I mean thousands upon thousands of dollars. However, the IRS doesn't care - they charge tax on all that.
There's a whole laundry list of things that are wrong with our tax system. Separating tax courts from civil courts is another big one. Why is legal battle due to non-payment of fees dealt with in non-civil court? Oh, I know why - because there is no contractual agreement between the parties involved and any such claims would never see the light of day in a civil court. It's more like: you give us money or else we come and brake your bones, we SWAT you, we bust in your house in the middle of the night, etc. But all this certainly sounds very appropriate for the land of the free home of the brave.
Well, any wording of the sort "under penalty of perjury" in a document can be rightfully rejected based on the 5th amendment. The 1040 has this wording before the signature line. You're being forced to sign on the dotted line (the key word here is "forced") of a document that can be used against you in court because if anything on that document is not correct it could be used against you in a perjury case. We're all well aware of the consequences for not signing the 1040 form.
The 5th amendment is widely used when in criminal investigation you have the right to refuse to answer any questions during cross-examination with investigators where your own answers could (and would) be used to convict you. Refusing to answer questions does not make you guilty.
Yeah, the guy was so horny he couldn't stop watching his kidde porn even when he approached the border guards. I find that hard to believe. especially that the guy obviously is not stupid (he encrypted his drive for god's sake - how many smart people do you know who know how to do this?).
These border guards are full of it - but you know what - if the guy is headed for jail it'd be smart of him to give them his pass to show them he's got no kiddie porn. if he withholds that then he must have something to hide that would get him more jailtime than kiddie porn.
Or, you could just bend over and hold on to your toes. which is what you'd probably do since you have no idea what the Constitution stands for, you moron!
Ok, why is it then that when taxpayers refuse to sign their 1040 tax forms they are taken to court and convicted to end up in jail? The 5th amendment to the Constitution gives you the right to refuse to incriminate yourself. The IRS forcing you to sign the 1040 under penalty of perjury DOES JUST THAT!
Oh, I know why - because - see, when you get to the court of the IRS it's not a regular court, noooo. It's a TAX COURT. And this means you're screwed until unscrewed! The 1040 tax bullshit would not stand a chance in civil court!
And they will listen, the issue here is - will the Feds get a warrant? WARRANT!
Did you ever think that maybe, just maybe, those bastards that are listening on other people's conversations use that information to profit? Like for example eavesdropping on corporate acquisition negotiations? People who have ADVANCE KNOWLEDGE can make a killing of money trading stocks. DID YOU THINK ABOUT THAT? HUH? NO YOU DIDN'T. All you think is: "terrorists are talking and I want to know what they're up to!"
Sit back and think about what I just said. And stop being a moron!
Really? If the bill is "GUARANTEED TO PASS ANYWAY" why do we even have a Senate? Why do we have senators at all voting, if "GUARANTEED TO PASS ANYWAY"???
Why don't we just fire them all - those bills are "GUARANTEED TO PASS ANYWAY" - somehow miraculously?
You're coming from a very ignorant position of helplessness. Leaders don't decide anything in Washington. Have you read the Constitution? It says representatives vote, leaders have no role in decision making when it comes to legislation, with the exception of the President who can veto a bill that has less than 75% Aye's.
The fact that we have corruption and reckless criminals in Washington is another matter.
Obama was never the best candidate. Ron Paul was the best candidate. Now America is left with two incompetent corrupt candidates that I could care less which one wins.
I'm strapping on and expecting turbulent times soon!
Bullshit! They intentionally write bills that have good things in them so suckers like you can say: "Well, my senator voted for it but it wasn't all bad... and after all there was no better bill out there"
All you're doing is rationalizing. Stop with these lame straw man arguments. Just ask yourself - do you think he'd vote this way if the Democratic race was still going?
Well, it's not as bad as you make it out to be. That's why he's a senator - he can write legislation that is not broad but very specific. Obama needed to vote NO on this FISA bill and propose another one. What's so difficult? "You're damn if you do and you're damn if you don't"? Bullshit!
Yeah let's do that! And, to close that "parity" why don't we just tax 100% of poor people's earnings. This way we will effectively starve all poor people to death and this will get us rid of the poor class! The ones of us left would be only middle and upper class! Yay! No more poverty!
why the hell were you disappointed? it was obvious. just look at his past record. he will not get us out of iraq. I can bet on it!
When Ron Paul was in the race all you yuppies liked to say "he's good but has no chance". well, now thanks to all you yuppies, people like me have no chance. I mean who do we vote for now? mcInsane? this guy is completely NUTS!!! Obama is a habitual liar and flip-flopper - he's just disgusting! he reminds me of Clinton.
I guess we the smart people will just wait it out until it gets really bad in this country and all the fools/losers/procrastinators/shoppers/irresponsible spenders/environmentalists die waiting for help from their government, also wait for the religious nuts to die waiting for jesus (and the government) to help them, and then when the ratio of morons to intelligent reverses from 95/5 to 5/95 it'll be time for some REAL change in this country! Until then - keep your money away from the government, do not buy into government's low ARM's/affordable housing/strong dollar/fake money bullshit and just chug along waiting for the worst! The sunrise will soon follow.
[quote]
Overall wouldn't you expect that contributors would donate to candidates who share their opinions? So how do you know if the candidates are bending their opinions to fit the contributors' wishes, or if we're just seeing a rather obvious pattern of correlation based on shared opinions? Answering these questions adequately takes a lot more work that pointing at contribution patterns alone.
[/quote]
Actually, no. I could care less what his opinions are. Every politician is supposed to, under oath, uphold the Constitution of the United States. The 10th amendment says the federal government has no authority over issues that are not specifically granted to it. Every other issue should be left to the states to decide. Moreover, this HR 4279 may be infringing on the 4th Amendment as well.So there are a lot of constitutional issues that I can think of with such bill.
Everyone has opinions but when you start imposing your opinions on others in clear contradiction to the Constitution we've got a problem.
Now, if you mean - does it make sense if Mr. Whatever is sponsoring such bill? Yes, it does. Or he'll lose his job. What makes no sense is all the other puppets in congress who nod approvingly.
This one is easy. A quick look at John Conyers' political contributions shows the movie/music industry is the second largest political contributor to his campaign. Check out this link:
http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/summary.php?cycle=2006&cid=N00004029
Who loves the MPAA/RIAA nowadays? Only the sellouts.
it is true. you're touchin on one of america's major problems - lobbyists and special interests in Washington. as a matter of fact, passing legislation to ban gambling on the Federal level is unconstitutional, the Tenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution reads:
"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
There is no provision in the Constitution that gives rights to Congress to regulate gambling.
so what's your point? yes, we all know the US has more prison population than China - we knew that yesterday. What they're saying here is that anyone that opposes the government puts oneself in precarious situation. and jail is one option.
How come then, if the Chinese are so happy with their government that government cracks down on internet censorship and filters western information sources? I'd think if the majority of chinese people were so happy with their government then the government would have nothing to worry about, right?
So, your argument makes no sense does it?
In Soviet Russia they had demonstrations to celebrate Communism & Socialism - thousands of people would show up and cheer. You know why? Because if you failed to show up, they'd kick your ass the following day and made sure you're still loyal to the regime.
I am always amazed how the problem of outrageous T-shirts that offend others happens in PUBLIC places only (schools,streets, etc.). If there were no public schools and everyone went to private schools such issues would never arise because any such silly arguments would be put down in the contract or would be resolved in court.
I agree with you 100%. What you said reminds me of 911 and how our government tells us that we need to sacrifice some freedom for security. This is just despicable!
"I'd say you have no idea what love is until you have kids."
Really? Poor me... What do I know about life? Aaaaah...
Question: Did you adopt your child?
You can call my ideas ridiculous but if you read my post again you will notice I placed many valid questions you did not address. So, please don't just toss my ideas out the window before you answered the questions (unless you don't want a debate, but rather a session of finger-pointing and name-calling). I will not repeat them but please try to answer the questions.
The United States of America became the great country it was (until the last 20-30 years) because of the Constitution that guided all statutory and common law decisions this country has made. The Constitution is the most libertarian legal document because our founders were libertarians - and this is a fact, not an opinion.
We have lost confidence in ourselves because we got too used to having our hand held all the time and when things go south on us we tend to point fingers (in the wrong directions mostly). Just look at the collapsing dollar, huge trade deficit, Hurricane Katrina, gas prices, bad education in our schools, etc.
When you grew up in the US you did not have educational system based on freedom and free markets. You had a MANAGED EDUCATION. Property taxes pay for most of education and property taxes have paid for education since WWII. Private schools were to be afforded by the well-off families. So unless your parents were well-off I'm sure you ended up in a public school. And just look at where public school system has taken our children! One in five in this country cannot find the US on the map!!!
So there you have it - your state-sponsored education has brought us more ignorance than ever. Also, don't place too much blame on our formal educational system - remember - education is a lifelong path.
The Nordic countries and their phenomenal quality of life is another topic. All I must say is that these Nordic countries have an economy whose days are numbered. Yes, I know it looks very pretty right now but the welfare state and the fiat currency system will collapse it - you may not see it coming now and it may not happen within the next 40-50 years but it will end badly. The rules of Nature and Economics cannot be opposed for too long.
I liked it when you said "No one is forcing you to move over here.". So you obviously belive in people's right to self-determination, right? Therefore I should not be paying for other people's kids' education if I don't have kids or I send my kids to private school. However, what will happen if I refuse to pay my property tax? So even though you support tax-based educational system you indirectly contradict yourself.
And I am sure the people there are not "under the boot of the government" - Goethe once said, "None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free."
But I can tell you have the courage to look under the hood and I encourage you to read the Rothbard's book - you'll like it.
What if I don't like what the Finnish schools are teaching my child/ren? What if I want my kids to take courses in Turkish as early as 6? Will the Finnish school provide for that? What if Finnish schools teach Darwin's Theory of Evolution and I am religious and don't believe any of that? Who gives them the right to extort money from me so I can sponsor ideology I don't support?
What if I wanted to pay for private school in Finland? Will the tax department reimburse me for taxing me for education?
What if my child has a condition that requires a special diet? Will the school/daycare provide for that? If not - will the tax man reimburse me for taxes not used as well?
I'm sorry but your idea of state-sponsored education is fuzzy and upon further investigation sounds like a complete ripoff. I would never sign up for such system.
People should be free to decide for themselves where they want to educate their kids and to choose how much they want to pay for it. The idea of private schools gives you the freedom to:
1. Pick the school that teaches what you believe is good for your children.
2. Pick the best schools that you can afford without being coerced by government into actions you wouldn't otherwise take.
Let's legalize freedom and the free markets! Let's legalize liberty and every person's right to self-determination.
For more information on the ideas presented above I encourage you to read Murray Rothbard's "To a New Liberty" and you will soon understand where I'm coming from. And while you read it, remember: You can never accomplish by force what you could accomplish voluntarily.
Slashdot Mirror
The Supreme Court loves to create their own interpretations of the Constitution of the United States. Especially when they "interpret" the Second Amendment. The 5th Amendment is as clear as blue sky, it makes NO exceptions. Once you make one exception you start going down the slippery slope. Next thing you know we have a Patriot Act where you are safe from unreasonable searches and seizures, EXCEPT for anti-terror cases. I'm not sure why the Supreme Court would make an exception for taxation, except that a gang of elites is running this country and have no regard for basic human rights. Just because the Supreme Court said it's ok to do something it doesn't mean it's the right thing to do. And I understand that the Supreme Court is the law of the land, but the reality is that unfortunately the Supreme Court has ignored the Constitution on multiple occasions.
At least one of the things the Constitution stands for is an income tax.
This is certainly debatable, but I will not get into this. The fact of the matter is that the IRS uses unconstitutional means to collect taxes, forcing people to sign 1040's is certainly a big one. Another one is the unreasonable expectation on their part that 100% of my income is a profit (ok, 100% minus standard deduction which is some ridiculously low number) thus putting me as an individual earner at disadvantage compared to business owners who can deduct all kinds of expenses. I have many expenses while working as an employee: I pay for health insurance, gas expenses, food while at work, computer purchases at home, internet access at home, phone, software, job site membership fees, I mean thousands upon thousands of dollars. However, the IRS doesn't care - they charge tax on all that. There's a whole laundry list of things that are wrong with our tax system. Separating tax courts from civil courts is another big one. Why is legal battle due to non-payment of fees dealt with in non-civil court? Oh, I know why - because there is no contractual agreement between the parties involved and any such claims would never see the light of day in a civil court. It's more like: you give us money or else we come and brake your bones, we SWAT you, we bust in your house in the middle of the night, etc. But all this certainly sounds very appropriate for the land of the free home of the brave.
Well, any wording of the sort "under penalty of perjury" in a document can be rightfully rejected based on the 5th amendment. The 1040 has this wording before the signature line. You're being forced to sign on the dotted line (the key word here is "forced") of a document that can be used against you in court because if anything on that document is not correct it could be used against you in a perjury case. We're all well aware of the consequences for not signing the 1040 form. The 5th amendment is widely used when in criminal investigation you have the right to refuse to answer any questions during cross-examination with investigators where your own answers could (and would) be used to convict you. Refusing to answer questions does not make you guilty.
Yeah, the guy was so horny he couldn't stop watching his kidde porn even when he approached the border guards. I find that hard to believe. especially that the guy obviously is not stupid (he encrypted his drive for god's sake - how many smart people do you know who know how to do this?). These border guards are full of it - but you know what - if the guy is headed for jail it'd be smart of him to give them his pass to show them he's got no kiddie porn. if he withholds that then he must have something to hide that would get him more jailtime than kiddie porn.
Or, you could just bend over and hold on to your toes. which is what you'd probably do since you have no idea what the Constitution stands for, you moron!
Ok, why is it then that when taxpayers refuse to sign their 1040 tax forms they are taken to court and convicted to end up in jail? The 5th amendment to the Constitution gives you the right to refuse to incriminate yourself. The IRS forcing you to sign the 1040 under penalty of perjury DOES JUST THAT! Oh, I know why - because - see, when you get to the court of the IRS it's not a regular court, noooo. It's a TAX COURT. And this means you're screwed until unscrewed! The 1040 tax bullshit would not stand a chance in civil court!
And they will listen, the issue here is - will the Feds get a warrant? WARRANT! Did you ever think that maybe, just maybe, those bastards that are listening on other people's conversations use that information to profit? Like for example eavesdropping on corporate acquisition negotiations? People who have ADVANCE KNOWLEDGE can make a killing of money trading stocks. DID YOU THINK ABOUT THAT? HUH? NO YOU DIDN'T. All you think is: "terrorists are talking and I want to know what they're up to!" Sit back and think about what I just said. And stop being a moron!
Really? If the bill is "GUARANTEED TO PASS ANYWAY" why do we even have a Senate? Why do we have senators at all voting, if "GUARANTEED TO PASS ANYWAY"??? Why don't we just fire them all - those bills are "GUARANTEED TO PASS ANYWAY" - somehow miraculously? You're coming from a very ignorant position of helplessness. Leaders don't decide anything in Washington. Have you read the Constitution? It says representatives vote, leaders have no role in decision making when it comes to legislation, with the exception of the President who can veto a bill that has less than 75% Aye's. The fact that we have corruption and reckless criminals in Washington is another matter.
Obama was never the best candidate. Ron Paul was the best candidate. Now America is left with two incompetent corrupt candidates that I could care less which one wins. I'm strapping on and expecting turbulent times soon!
Bullshit! They intentionally write bills that have good things in them so suckers like you can say: "Well, my senator voted for it but it wasn't all bad... and after all there was no better bill out there" All you're doing is rationalizing. Stop with these lame straw man arguments. Just ask yourself - do you think he'd vote this way if the Democratic race was still going?
Well, it's not as bad as you make it out to be. That's why he's a senator - he can write legislation that is not broad but very specific. Obama needed to vote NO on this FISA bill and propose another one. What's so difficult? "You're damn if you do and you're damn if you don't"? Bullshit!
Yeah let's do that! And, to close that "parity" why don't we just tax 100% of poor people's earnings. This way we will effectively starve all poor people to death and this will get us rid of the poor class! The ones of us left would be only middle and upper class! Yay! No more poverty!
why the hell were you disappointed? it was obvious. just look at his past record. he will not get us out of iraq. I can bet on it! When Ron Paul was in the race all you yuppies liked to say "he's good but has no chance". well, now thanks to all you yuppies, people like me have no chance. I mean who do we vote for now? mcInsane? this guy is completely NUTS!!! Obama is a habitual liar and flip-flopper - he's just disgusting! he reminds me of Clinton. I guess we the smart people will just wait it out until it gets really bad in this country and all the fools/losers/procrastinators/shoppers/irresponsible spenders/environmentalists die waiting for help from their government, also wait for the religious nuts to die waiting for jesus (and the government) to help them, and then when the ratio of morons to intelligent reverses from 95/5 to 5/95 it'll be time for some REAL change in this country! Until then - keep your money away from the government, do not buy into government's low ARM's/affordable housing/strong dollar/fake money bullshit and just chug along waiting for the worst! The sunrise will soon follow.
[quote] Overall wouldn't you expect that contributors would donate to candidates who share their opinions? So how do you know if the candidates are bending their opinions to fit the contributors' wishes, or if we're just seeing a rather obvious pattern of correlation based on shared opinions? Answering these questions adequately takes a lot more work that pointing at contribution patterns alone. [/quote] Actually, no. I could care less what his opinions are. Every politician is supposed to, under oath, uphold the Constitution of the United States. The 10th amendment says the federal government has no authority over issues that are not specifically granted to it. Every other issue should be left to the states to decide. Moreover, this HR 4279 may be infringing on the 4th Amendment as well.So there are a lot of constitutional issues that I can think of with such bill. Everyone has opinions but when you start imposing your opinions on others in clear contradiction to the Constitution we've got a problem. Now, if you mean - does it make sense if Mr. Whatever is sponsoring such bill? Yes, it does. Or he'll lose his job. What makes no sense is all the other puppets in congress who nod approvingly.
This one is easy. A quick look at John Conyers' political contributions shows the movie/music industry is the second largest political contributor to his campaign. Check out this link: http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/summary.php?cycle=2006&cid=N00004029 Who loves the MPAA/RIAA nowadays? Only the sellouts.
I agree - the interstate commerce clause is out of control.
it is true. you're touchin on one of america's major problems - lobbyists and special interests in Washington. as a matter of fact, passing legislation to ban gambling on the Federal level is unconstitutional, the Tenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution reads: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." There is no provision in the Constitution that gives rights to Congress to regulate gambling.
so what's your point? yes, we all know the US has more prison population than China - we knew that yesterday. What they're saying here is that anyone that opposes the government puts oneself in precarious situation. and jail is one option.
How come then, if the Chinese are so happy with their government that government cracks down on internet censorship and filters western information sources? I'd think if the majority of chinese people were so happy with their government then the government would have nothing to worry about, right? So, your argument makes no sense does it? In Soviet Russia they had demonstrations to celebrate Communism & Socialism - thousands of people would show up and cheer. You know why? Because if you failed to show up, they'd kick your ass the following day and made sure you're still loyal to the regime.
I am always amazed how the problem of outrageous T-shirts that offend others happens in PUBLIC places only (schools,streets, etc.). If there were no public schools and everyone went to private schools such issues would never arise because any such silly arguments would be put down in the contract or would be resolved in court.
I agree with you 100%. What you said reminds me of 911 and how our government tells us that we need to sacrifice some freedom for security. This is just despicable!
"I'd say you have no idea what love is until you have kids." Really? Poor me... What do I know about life? Aaaaah... Question: Did you adopt your child?
... and you are paying for it with your taxes.
You can call my ideas ridiculous but if you read my post again you will notice I placed many valid questions you did not address. So, please don't just toss my ideas out the window before you answered the questions (unless you don't want a debate, but rather a session of finger-pointing and name-calling). I will not repeat them but please try to answer the questions. The United States of America became the great country it was (until the last 20-30 years) because of the Constitution that guided all statutory and common law decisions this country has made. The Constitution is the most libertarian legal document because our founders were libertarians - and this is a fact, not an opinion. We have lost confidence in ourselves because we got too used to having our hand held all the time and when things go south on us we tend to point fingers (in the wrong directions mostly). Just look at the collapsing dollar, huge trade deficit, Hurricane Katrina, gas prices, bad education in our schools, etc. When you grew up in the US you did not have educational system based on freedom and free markets. You had a MANAGED EDUCATION. Property taxes pay for most of education and property taxes have paid for education since WWII. Private schools were to be afforded by the well-off families. So unless your parents were well-off I'm sure you ended up in a public school. And just look at where public school system has taken our children! One in five in this country cannot find the US on the map!!! So there you have it - your state-sponsored education has brought us more ignorance than ever. Also, don't place too much blame on our formal educational system - remember - education is a lifelong path. The Nordic countries and their phenomenal quality of life is another topic. All I must say is that these Nordic countries have an economy whose days are numbered. Yes, I know it looks very pretty right now but the welfare state and the fiat currency system will collapse it - you may not see it coming now and it may not happen within the next 40-50 years but it will end badly. The rules of Nature and Economics cannot be opposed for too long. I liked it when you said "No one is forcing you to move over here.". So you obviously belive in people's right to self-determination, right? Therefore I should not be paying for other people's kids' education if I don't have kids or I send my kids to private school. However, what will happen if I refuse to pay my property tax? So even though you support tax-based educational system you indirectly contradict yourself. And I am sure the people there are not "under the boot of the government" - Goethe once said, "None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free." But I can tell you have the courage to look under the hood and I encourage you to read the Rothbard's book - you'll like it.
What if I don't like what the Finnish schools are teaching my child/ren? What if I want my kids to take courses in Turkish as early as 6? Will the Finnish school provide for that? What if Finnish schools teach Darwin's Theory of Evolution and I am religious and don't believe any of that? Who gives them the right to extort money from me so I can sponsor ideology I don't support? What if I wanted to pay for private school in Finland? Will the tax department reimburse me for taxing me for education? What if my child has a condition that requires a special diet? Will the school/daycare provide for that? If not - will the tax man reimburse me for taxes not used as well? I'm sorry but your idea of state-sponsored education is fuzzy and upon further investigation sounds like a complete ripoff. I would never sign up for such system. People should be free to decide for themselves where they want to educate their kids and to choose how much they want to pay for it. The idea of private schools gives you the freedom to: 1. Pick the school that teaches what you believe is good for your children. 2. Pick the best schools that you can afford without being coerced by government into actions you wouldn't otherwise take. Let's legalize freedom and the free markets! Let's legalize liberty and every person's right to self-determination. For more information on the ideas presented above I encourage you to read Murray Rothbard's "To a New Liberty" and you will soon understand where I'm coming from. And while you read it, remember: You can never accomplish by force what you could accomplish voluntarily.