Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Congressman Rob Wittman Cosponsors Fair Tax
Americans For Fair Taxation ^

Posted on 02/21/2008 12:23:50 PM PST by Man50D

The Americans For Fair Taxation welcomes Congressman Rob Wittman to The Fair Tax movement. He joined The Fair Tax movement on February 14th. Representative Wittman is the 74th cosponsor. His signing is the second in February. Clearly the grassroots momentum for The Fair Tax is growing! Please keep up your enthusiasm for Fair Tax! Congratulations Representative Wittman for joining The Fair Tax movement!


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: 110th; entitlement; fairtax; fairtaxscam; national; newirs; program; robwittman; salestax; taxreform
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-64 next last
To: In veno, veritas

“personally attacked” whom, exactly?

Please be specific.


41 posted on 02/22/2008 1:56:50 PM PST by xcamel (Two-hand-voting now in play - One on lever, other holding nose.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: xcamel
It looks like you attacked anyone who doesn’t agree with you (or at least someone in favor of the fair-tax). A personal attack doesn’t have to be just one single person.
42 posted on 02/22/2008 2:06:26 PM PST by In veno, veritas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: In veno, veritas

That’s called bending the rules to fit your agenda.

well noted by everyone.


43 posted on 02/22/2008 2:17:34 PM PST by xcamel (Two-hand-voting now in play - One on lever, other holding nose.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Hostage
It is the 16th that is the root of the cancer. It will always come back to make society sick until another reform provides relief.

The FairTax is just another kind of cancer.

44 posted on 02/22/2008 2:22:34 PM PST by lucysmom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: xcamel
No it isn’t. If I said, “Congressmen are all liars,” that would be another example of a personal attack on multiple people. Your comment, although implicit, is still a personal attack.
45 posted on 02/22/2008 2:33:10 PM PST by In veno, veritas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: In veno, veritas

Why don’t you concentrate on the topic, instead of just trying to make trouble?


46 posted on 02/22/2008 2:41:09 PM PST by xcamel (Two-hand-voting now in play - One on lever, other holding nose.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: xcamel

LOL!


47 posted on 02/22/2008 2:46:11 PM PST by In veno, veritas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: In veno, veritas
People who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones..

Can Liberals End the War?
Posted by In veno, veritas to rface
On News/Activism 01/07/2008 10:08:20 AM EST · 12 of 30

Googled the authors name. Short version is that he’s a Marxist idiot. One day he will hopefully awaken from his fantasy world, but I doubt it. He'll probably spend the rest of his life being an idiot but not realize it because he went to Harvard.

48 posted on 02/22/2008 3:00:20 PM PST by xcamel (Two-hand-voting now in play - One on lever, other holding nose.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: xcamel
Wow, you spent all that time finding that one? That is another fine example of a personal attack. Good job! Still, that is no defense for you to post all of your personal attacks on the fellow freepers.
49 posted on 02/22/2008 3:13:31 PM PST by In veno, veritas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: Man50D; Turret Gunner A20
Sorry, I guess I’ve hijacked the thread. Didn’t mean too.
50 posted on 02/22/2008 3:15:21 PM PST by In veno, veritas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #51 Removed by Moderator

To: xcamel
You've got me. I'll reform. First let me apologize to Adaner Usmani who is the author, of this: "Can Liberals End the War?" (Not a fellow freeper, BTW, nor was I directly debating him.) Does this satisfy you enough to quit loading FT articles with Ad Hominem attacks? I resisted responding to you with one. : )
52 posted on 02/22/2008 3:30:24 PM PST by In veno, veritas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: In veno, veritas
Drats. Messed up the link. Can Liberals End the War?
53 posted on 02/22/2008 3:32:20 PM PST by In veno, veritas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: In veno, veritas

caught red-handed, and still in deep deep denial.

very sad indeed.


54 posted on 02/22/2008 3:41:19 PM PST by xcamel (Two-hand-voting now in play - One on lever, other holding nose.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: xcamel
What denial? I said that I would reform! Will you also stop posting personal attacks?
55 posted on 02/22/2008 3:54:51 PM PST by In veno, veritas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: In veno, veritas

you call maintaining false accusations “reform” ?


56 posted on 02/22/2008 4:04:38 PM PST by xcamel (Two-hand-voting now in play - One on lever, other holding nose.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: xcamel
What false accusations?
57 posted on 02/23/2008 6:19:22 PM PST by In veno, veritas (Please identify my Ad Hominem attacks. I should be debating ideas.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: In veno, veritas; xcamel; All
What denial? I said that I would reform! Will you also stop posting personal attacks?

He's not going to stop. It's a concerted effort by x and several other well know anti-FairTaxers to hijack all FT threads and get them moved to Smokey Backroom or locked.

I suggest that a reply from any of the following simply be ignored. That will render them ineffective.

xcamel
lewislynn
your nightmare
always right
lucysmom

(x suggested to me on another thread that we turn up the heat and when I did he cried like a baby. He can dish it out but he can't take it.)

58 posted on 02/24/2008 8:19:53 AM PST by cowboyway ("No damn man kills me and lives." -- Nathan Bedford Forrest)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: cowboyway

Not to mention you breaking every rule in the FR book and getting away with it..
People like you should be banned.


59 posted on 02/24/2008 8:29:39 AM PST by xcamel (Two-hand-voting now in play - One on lever, other holding nose.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: Republic of Texas
Article V of the U.S. Constitution specifies the ratification process, and requires 3/4 of the States to ratify any amendment proposed by Congress. There were 48 States in the American Union in 1913, meaning that affirmative action of 36 states was required for ratification. In February, 1913, Secretary of State Philander Knox issued a proclamation claiming that 38 states had ratified the amendment.

In 1984, William J. Benson began a research project, never before performed, to investigate the process of ratification of the 16th Amendment. After traveling to the capitols of the New England states, and reviewing the journals of the state legislative bodies, he saw that many states had not ratified the Amendment. Continuing his research at the National Archives in Washington, DC, Bill Benson discovered his Golden Key. This damning piece of evidence is a 16 page memorandum from the Solicitor of the Department of State, whose duty is the provision of legal opinions for the use of the Secretary of State. In this memorandum sent to the Secretary of State, the Solicitor of the Department of State lists the many errors he found in the ratification process!

The 4 states listed below are among the 38 states that Philander Knox claimed ratification from.

The Kentucky Senate voted upon the resolution, but rejected it by a vote of 9 in favor and 22 opposed.
The Oklahoma Senate amended the language of the 16th Amendment to have a precisely opposite meaning.
The California legislative assembly never recorded any vote upon any proposal to adopt the amendment proposed by Congress.
The State of Minnesota sent nothing to the Secretary of State in Washington.
When his year long project was finished at the end of 1984, Bill had visited every state capitol and knew that not a single state had actually and legally ratified the proposal to amend the Constitution. 33 states engaged in the unauthorized activity of amending the language of the amendment proposed by congress, a power the states do not possess. Since 36 states were needed for ratification, the failure of 13 to ratify would be fatal to the amendment, and this occurs within the major (first three) defects tabulated in Defects in Ratification of the 16th Amendment. Even if we were to ignore defects of spelling, capitalization, and punctuation, we would still have only 2 states which successfully ratified.

60 posted on 02/24/2008 4:11:13 PM PST by Ronon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-64 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson