Ron Paul: 13th Amendment bans income tax

Youtube ^ | June 27, 2010 | RidleyReport

[citizenredstater9271]

Who agrees and who disagrees with Dr. Paul? I would like to see income tax abolished (it is socialism light) but what say other Freepers? Watch the video of course.

[Oceander]

To ratify is not the same as to enact. I've already posted more than enough on that point, so why don't you respond to that?

Beyond that, there is nothing else to respond to: the pretense ('cause it sure doesn't qualify as an argument) that the 13th Amendment somehow - magically, and by some strange aura or emanation or, dare I say, penumbra - repealed or modified Article V of the Constitution, or even better, magically anticipated the 16th Amendment and then somehow, through some sleight of hand (perhaps a legislative wormhole) repealed the 16th Amendment before it was even contemplated by, let alone proposed by, Congress, is simply not worth any more time and effort - it should be self-evident to all but a liberal that, unless the 13th Amendment changed the operative language of Article V - which it did not - that the 13th Amendment cannot have had any effect on the 16th Amendment; rather, to the extent that there is any conflict between the 13th and the 16th, the 16th controls.

[ejonesie22]

I am familiar with the Ludwigs “school”.

Anyways, big on theory, short on application in the real world.

Private armies are the thing of kings (CEOs) and that can open a Pandora’s box of issues. There was a reason the founders provided for a government run military.

Of course you Paulinati and your beloved Ron Paul are all smarter than the founders as well as the rest of us “fake conservatives”. In fact despite making admiring references to the founding fathers Ron Paul and his followers have much better tdeas than they on running the USA.

Crackpot is not going to fix the country, a sound approach based on the ideas of the founding fathers tempered with a Conservative approach to the necessities of 21st century realities will.

That will, whether we like it or not, require some way of paying for the things only the government can do. The trick is to stick to those things that are absolutely essential, the things the states cannot do or are required to coordinate between the states such as military, transport and such.

BTW I take it you are no fan of Ronald Reagan.

[olrtex]

“’I have no problem with an income tax in general.’
Such an odd statement for a conservative forum....”

“Conservative forum” does not mean “check-your-brain-at-the-door forum.”

The federal government clearly spends lots and lots of money that it should not spend. However, the federal government provides some essential services, as intended by the framers of the Constitution and as desired by a huge majority of Americans. Maintaining the Armed Services and fighting wars are two of those services. In some cases, the federal government spends less than it should. Border security comes to mind.

Taxes must be levied to raise the money the federal government needs to spend on essential services. An income tax seems to be the best way to do that. As I said previously, I do not like the current tax code; but I cannot think of a more appropriate source of revenue than a tax tied in some way to income.

[ejonesie22]

You are such a “fake conservative” with your “love of the Military” and wanting to deal with reality and stuff...

You probably support the imperialist war on terror and are a fan of Ronald Reagan too.

“Real conservatives” know the only way to assure the future of our Republic is to take it all apart even past what the founders envisioned or let it be destroyed...

Sheesh, get with the program...

[John D]

WHAT??? Dr. Paul is 100% pro-life. He has never come out in support of abortion.

WHAT??? If cut and run was not in support of abortion why did he demand an underage girl be allowd to cross state lines in order to get one?

[tisket]

What do you do - sleep with the IRC under your pillow?

That was the most convoluted answer, not to my posts, but to your own previous posts earlier in this thread. You sound like an IRS shill, for heaven's sake. Especially by throwing the epithet "liberal" at me. Only trolls seem to have a need to do that, as if by using the worst insult they can think of, they hope to derail logical discussion.

As I said earlier, a basic tenet of law is that there can be no contradiction. If this is something that is beyond your comprehension (or your pay grade) then any further explanation I can offer would be moot.

[tisket]

Try copying and pasting the URL.

If you don't file a 1040 the IRS will come after you with levies and seizures, confiscation and jail time. The courts back them up, so you have no recourse.

Go ahead, try not filing or paying and see where it gets you.

It doesn't matter that they have no laws to back them up if the courts do. Which is what I said earlier - and what Oceander said earlier also - if he's even capable of understanding his own posts.

[John D]

The Martians blew up the World Trade Center?

I do not think cut and run said Martians blew it up. He said it was America's fault.

[tisket]

The 16th was never ratified - tisket Since May 11, 2010

What is it with this high-school level you've only been around for a month - so, so so there idiocy?

I either have something worth saying or I don't. I stand by our founding fathers' original intent as expressed by them in our Constitution and the Declaration of Independence. I am anti-communist, anti-socialist, and anti-government dick-wads who think that because they're on the public dime and have a mandate to destroy America they're somehow above the rest of us.

I'll tell you what P-Marlowe, when you get out of high-school and develop some experience in conversing with adults, then we'll talk. Until then, you can lock yourself in the bathroom for a while like other teenage boys.

[tisket]

See post 107

[tisket]

“The 16th was never ratified - but being the feds, they just went ahead with collecting the money anyway.” Care to offer some support for that assertion?

See post 107

[P-Marlowe]

What is it with this high-school level you've only been around for a month - so, so so there idiocy?

The 16th was ratified. Get over it. Either that or stand by your principles and refuse to pay it.

I dare you.

[tisket]

“The 16th was never ratified - but being the feds, they just went ahead with collecting the money anyway.” Care to offer some support for that assertion?

http://www.thelawthatneverwas.com/new/home.asp

[tisket]

. . . sigh . . .

I guess I'll just have to wait until you graduate :)

[tisket]

Ha ha! Yeah, that is becoming very apparent :)

[ejonesie22]

The point of the born on date bit is that we get a wash of DU trolls and Paultards running around here spouting off nutsoid things that make conservatives look like idiots.

Things like the 16th Amendment, a law of the books for nearly 100 years, wasn't ratified for example.

Those folks have a short shelf life, especially when they get saucy with the sane and conservative members of FR.

Anyways, do you really think if that was a viable argument you, Ron Paul and the other conspiracy types are the first ones to realize it since 1913 and will now single handeled make it null and void.

Crackpot will not save this land, conservatism, based in reality and working with in the realm of the possible, will.

[P-Marlowe]

I guess I'll just have to wait until you graduate :)

Unlike you, I graduated kindergarten.

Hey noob what is YOUR level of education?

I believe you have been making silly arguments with lawyers and other educated people who have been showing you your ignorance. Are you capable of learning?

[ejonesie22]

Hey P, you got an over/under on how long this Paultard batch lasts once we get in to the thick of the next election...

Sheesh, those were the days, being lectured about the Constitution and told how sorry a conservative I was by the surrender monkeys..

[ejonesie22]

Never underestimate the Constitutional law prowess of a Starbucks employee stoned in his mom's basement eating Skittles while cruising the WWW...

[tisket]

While it can be true that some just join a site to stir up trouble, like liberal shills hired by the Obama admin, there are also legitimate conservatives who have been reading Free Republic for many years and have just now decided to join in the good fight online, as it were. To lump all newcomers into the "DU" catagory is not only insulting to those who may be your allies, but foolish, because you would be alienating a kindred warrior.

As I said earlier, someone either has legitiamte points to make or they don't. And their join date is irrelevant to that purpose.