Skip to comments.Vanity: Rush Limbaugh sleeps while Herman Cain attacks free market and federalism
Posted on 10/23/2011 4:57:25 PM PDT by JOHN W K
In November of 2010 in Don’t be VAT stupid Herman Cain writes:
``A national retail sales tax on top of all the confusing and unfair taxes we have today is insane! It gives the out-of-control bureaucrats and politicians in denial one more tool to lie, deceive, manipulate and destroy this country.``
The fact is, Herman is now proposing a new tax, a national retail sales tax, in addition to taxing corporate profits and incomes, and also would tax the wages working people earn. Herman Cain essentially admitted in the above mentioned article his existing plan is ``insane!`` So, why do so many “conservatives” support this Washington Establishment Hobson’s Choice candidate whose mission is to give another taxing power to Congress with which to ``lie, deceive, manipulate and destroy this country``?
And why is it that our ``conservative`` talk show hosts give this former federal reserve bank chairman, a Washington Establishment insider, a pass on his ``opportunity zones`` which attack our free market system? Why do they not object to Mr. Cain proposing to give preferential treatment under law that would relieve residents living in his designated “opportunity zones” a duty to contribute an equal tax burden as those not within his designated zones? Is this proposed preference of commerce not in defiance of our founder’s intentions when they added the following words to our Constitution? “No Preference shall be given by any Regulation of Commerce or Revenue to the Ports of one State over those of another: nor shall Vessels bound to, or from, one State, be obliged to enter, clear or pay Duties in another.”
Why is it that our “conservative” talk show hosts are silent in connection with Herman Cain’s proposed assumption of power to enter the various united States to enforce unequal law and meddle in each State’s internal commerce when such activity defies the very words of our founder‘s intentions which are summarized as follows? “The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce; with which last the power of taxation will, for the most part, be connected.
The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the State”.
Has FoxNews, Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, Laura Ingraham, Schnitt, Mark Levin, Dennis Prager, Bill O'rielly, Mike Gallagher, Lee Rodgers, Neal Boortz, Doc Thompson, Tammy Bruce, Monica Crowley, or any talk show questioned Herman Cain’s proposed assumption of powers which is very similar to that of Obama’s Solyndra type “green deals” which were hatched to plunder the American Taxpayer’s federal treasury and loot it of BILLIONS OF DOLLARS?
And why is it than none of the above “conservative” media personalities are concerned that a power to “designate” geographical areas within each of the various united States to be an “opportunity zone” invites political partisanship of the most dangerous kind in that a democrat president, as exhibited by the Obama Administration, will use such power to reward friends and punish political enemies? I thought Rush Limbaugh was the fountain of all political knowledge and would see through this Washington Establishment’s cooked up scheme to enlarge its blackmailing powers over the States [e.g., federal highway funds and the Establishment’s No Child Left Behind Act] and further enslave the defenders of a free market system. And these complaints do not even take into account how Herman Cain’s proposal feeds the class warfare game which our folks in Washington have learned to play to perfection with their good-cop bad-cop routine which is engaged in by the leadership of both political parties, and done so in concert!
And finally, where is Mark Levin who continually informs us of the virtues of federalism who seems to have closed his eyes to a wolf in sheep’s clothing whose mission is admittedly designed to further erode the defined and limited powers of our federal government as summarized by our very own Supreme Court shortly after our Constitution’s Tenth Amendment was adopted to preserve and protect the virtues of federalism?
“The government of the United States is of the latter description. The powers of the legislature are defined and limited; and that those limits may not be mistaken or forgotten, the constitution is written. To what purpose are powers limited, and to what purpose is that limitation committed to writing; if these limits may, at any time, be passed by those intended to be restrained? The distinction between a government with limited and unlimited powers is abolished, if those limits do not confine the persons on whom they are imposed, and if acts prohibited and acts allowed are of equal obligation. It is a proposition too plain to be contested, that the constitution controls any legislative act repugnant to it; or, that the legislature may alter the constitution by an ordinary act.
Between these alternatives there is no middle ground. The constitution is either a superior, paramount law, unchangeable by ordinary means, or it is on a level with ordinary legislative acts, and like other acts, is alterable when the legislature shall please to alter it.
If the former part of the alternative be true, then a legislative act contrary to the constitution is not law: if the latter part be true, then written constitutions are absurd attempts, on the part of the people, to limit a power in its own nature illimitable.
Certainly all those who have framed written constitutions contemplate them as forming the fundamental and paramount law of the nation, and consequently the theory of every such government must be, that an act of the legislature repugnant to the constitution is void.” ____ MARBURY v. MADISON, 5 U.S. 137 (1803)
"The Constitution is the act of the people, speaking in their original character, and defining the permanent conditions of the social alliance; and there can be no doubt on the point with us, that every act of the legislative power contrary to the true intent and meaning of the Constitution, is absolutely null and void. ___ Chancellor James Kent, in his Commentaries on American Law, 1858.
so how does the CURRENT tax code comply?
At least Cain’s 9-9-9 plan gets rid of 1,000+ pages of corrupt tax code
Many years ago Cain was a flat tax proponent - then he moved to the Fair Tax, which is all consumption tax (no corporate or income tax). He has been an advocate for the Fair Tax almost from the beginning.
When Cain started his run for President this year - he started on the Fair Tax platform. He began to talk to economists about the state of our country and realized things were in worse shape than he expected, so he came up with an “intermediary” plan, which is the 999. It is a “hybrid” of the Flat tax and Fair tax.
The plan is to create an economic boom (Paul Ryan confirmed the other day, yes it would create an economic surge), bring flat and fair taxers together, and give Cain and Congress an opportunity to cut spending. During this time, Cain hopes to educate people on the Fair Tax, which is phase II of his 999 plan.
That’s because they are anxious to make it seem like Cain is favoring blacks with the empowerment zones.
Very well said and hits the nail on the head.!!!!!
That’s because they are anxious to make it seem like Cain is favoring blacks with the empowerment zones.
I guess you missed what I wrote:
And why is it that none of the above “conservative” media personalities are concerned that a power to “designate” geographical areas within each of the various united States to be an “opportunity zone” invites political partisanship of the most dangerous kind in that a democrat president, as exhibited by the Obama Administration, will use such power to reward friends and punish political enemies? I thought Rush Limbaugh was the fountain of all political knowledge and would see through this Washington Establishment’s cooked up scheme to enlarge its blackmailing powers over the States [e.g., federal highway funds and the Establishment’s No Child Left Behind Act] and further enslave the defenders of a free market system. And these complaints do not even take into account how Herman Cain’s proposal feeds the class warfare game which our folks in Washington have learned to play to perfection with their good-cop bad-cop routine which is engaged in by the leadership of both political parties, and done so in concert!
Why are you bringing up the race card which is nothing more than a distraction from the evil which "opportunity zones" would bring?
I didn’t miss what you wrote. I didn’t bother reading what you wrote, since you started this thread with a pile of garbage.
For that matter, little is being offered about lobby reform and the MSM does not want to hone in on how legislation is being fabricated these days and lop-sided federal wages when compared to the private sector......no matter who wins (other than Zeewoe), not much will change for the good.
The federal debt is crippling potential economic growth and goobermint function.
I agree any sort of federal sales tax is a bad move, insofar as it green-lights the ability of the Feds to monitor every transaction, adjust the tax on all kinds of factors (individual financial & health history, exact product type), and extort ever more money out of pockets in lieu of reducing spending.
The way the lead article presents this view, however, is rather deranged.
Really? The truth is garbage?
"A Democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a Democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship." Author(s) unknown
Not only does Herman Cain want to keep alive the manipulative income tax, but he wants to enlarge the manipulation with a tax which touches the sale of every new manufactured product sold, a “national sales tax“, which in itself would violate another provision of our Constitution aside from Article 1, Section, 9 Clause 6. The violation being, that any general tax laid among the States was intended by our founders to be laid by the rule of apportionment which prevents a deadly evil of “democracy“.
Our founders understood a suicidal evil of democracy under which 51 percent of a nation’s population is free to tax away the property of the remaining 49 percent of the population. And to protect against such evil they adopted the rule of apportionment to be strictly enforced if imposts and duties (taxes at our water’s edge) and internal taxes on “judiciously selected” articles of consumption, were found insufficient to meet Congress’ expenditures, in which case a general tax was then to be laid among the States, but only in compliance with the rule of apportionment which predetermines each State’s fair share of a total sum being raised, and prevents the class warfare game. The formula being:
. _________ X SUM NEEDED = STATE`S SHARE OF TAX BURDEN
But don’t take my word for it, let our founding fathers speak for themselves and explain the rule of apportionment!
Pinckney addressing the S.C. ratification convention with regard to the rule of apportionment says:
“With regard to the general government imposing internal taxes upon us, he contended that it was absolutely necessary they should have such a power: requisitions had been in vain tried every year since the ratification of the old Confederation, and not a single state had paid the quota required of her. The general government could not abuse this power, and favor one state and oppress another, as each state was to be taxed only in proportion to its representation“__ 4 Elliot‘s, S.C., 305-6
Also see: “The proportion of taxes are fixed by the number of inhabitants, and not regulated by the extent of the territory, or fertility of soil” 3 Elliot`s, 243, “Each state will know, from its population, its proportion of any general tax” ___ Mr. George Nicholas, during the ratification debates of our Constitution.
And, Mr. Madison goes on to remark about Congress’s “general power of taxation” that, "they will be limited to fix the proportion of each State, and they must raise it in the most convenient and satisfactory manner to the public." 3 Elliot‘s, 255
And if there is any confusion about the rule of apportionment intentionally designed to cure an evil of democracy, and insure that the people of those states contributing the lion’s share of any general tax laid among the States to fund the federal government are guaranteed a proportional vote in Congress equal to their contribution, Mr. PENDLETON says:
“The apportionment of representation and taxation by the same scale is just; it removes the objection, that, while Virginia paid one sixth part of the expenses of the Union [under the Articles of Confederation], she had no more weight in public counsels than Delaware, which paid but a very small portion” 3 Elliot‘s 41
Also see an Act laying a direct tax for $3 million in which the rule of apportionment is applied.
And then see Section 7 of direct tax of 1813 allowing states to pay their respective quotas and be entitled to certain deductions in meeting their payment on time.
Herman Cain’s national sales tax perpetuates the very evil of “democracy” which our founding fathers provided protection against with the rule of apportionment, and it allows the Congressional Delegations of large populated States like pinko California to recklessly spend from the federal treasury without having to bring home the bill and hand it to their State’s Legislature and Governor who would then have to deplete the State’s Treasury to pay for the pork their Congressional Delegation bought while in Washington.
Unfortunately the rule of apportionment has been perverted by our government school teachers who teach our nation’s children that our Constitution, under Article 1, Section 2, Clause 3, Blacks were made 3/5th of a person.
And who among our “conservative” talk show hosts will explain our founding father’s true intentions for which the rule of apportionment was adopted?
Have you ever heard Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, Laura Ingraham, Schnitt, Mark Levin, Dennis Prager, Bill O'rielly, Mike Gallagher, Lee Rodgers, Neal Boortz. Tammy Bruce, Monica Crowley, or any talk show host ever summarize our founder’s intentions for which the rule of apportionment was adopted as applied to taxation?
If Herman Cain were sincere about offering a “bold plan” designed to control the irresponsible spending of Congress and one that would remove Congress’s manipulative hand from our once free market system, he would be promoting the 32 word plan which would re-establish our Constitution’s ORIGINAL TAX PLAN as our founders intended it to operate:
The Sixteenth Amendment is hereby repealed and Congress is henceforth forbidden to lay ``any`` tax or burden calculated from profits, gains, interest, salaries, wages, tips, inheritances or any other lawfully realized money
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.