Posted on 11/15/2002 7:42:45 AM PST by H8DEMS
The States. Normally it's the governor of a state, but the Constitution doesn't stipulate that. It would depend on the specific wording of each state's laws regarding the appointment of officers and training of the militia. Now will you tell us what your point is?
I am still wondering why you are asking this question. I imagine you think state militias actually exist. If that be the case, let me inform you that they have, for all practical purposes, went the way of the Dodo bird. The National Guard (a branch of the U.S. Army funded under the power to raise armies) is the modern day "replacement" for the state militias. National Guard officers are commissioned, generally, through direct appointment (certain specialties only, such as JAG and Medical), through Army ROTC, through OCS and WOCS, and through graduation from the United States Military Academy at West Point.
Let me ask you this: can Joe Six-Pack appoint himself a flag officer in his state's militia?
Sure 'nuff.
And I just appointed myself the "All-Being Master of Time, Space and Dimension".
:)
My appointment is about as meaningful as his.
I'd like to see the list of states where it is. I believe that the cardinality of the set "States that let Joe Six-Pack appoint himself to officer rank in the militia" is zero.
And when you look at these militias, they have officers. Heck, they have generals as platoon leaders.
Does the Declaration of Independence mean anything to you?
"But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security"
FR is a conservative site and because you are a moderate you should go elsewhere.
Poohbah(#45): You do not have a Constitutional right to engage in armed rebellion against tyranny. You have a moral right to do so;
jwh_Denver: Does the Declaration of Independence mean anything to you?
jD, Partial and out of context quotation is poor form, and easily spotted in a forum format. Does ethics and virtue mean anything to you?
Yeah they do. It's called aid to ISRAEL. Without tax dollars---no money for the Hebrews.
Sorry to inform you but just because someone decides to put something into a code---it still does not trump the CONSTITUTION. And the CONSTITUTION states that taxes can only be levied by congress and must be APPORTIONED. So goodbye to the damned Communist manifesto progessive income tax that steals the wealth of the country and makes us all slaves.
Bad news. Congress passed that statute I cited, and the 16th Ammendment says they don't have to be apportioned.
To quote Jonah Jameson from Spiderman "Slander is spoken; in print it's libel" :)
You sound confused. Prior to the federal government usurping militia power from the states and the people and handing it over to the U.S. Army, the militia consisted of all adult males, with most of the power maintained in the states. "Joe Six-Pack", while not adhering strictly to the "letter of the law", is probably more in line with the original intent of the Constitution than the modern day federal government and their state government tag-a-longs. Too bad there are not enough good men in America to help "Joe Six-Pack" steer the governments back in line.
BTW, the National Guard is a Select Militia, which the founders mentioned in the Federalist Papers. It is not the militia of intent since it provides no protection of the people from tyrannical government.
The Constitution does not grant rights. Rights are endowed by our Creator, as plainly stated in the Declaration of Independence. Governments are instituted among men to secure those rights.
Well, for one thing, Schulz and his buddies are talking about bringing a million armed people into DC and overthrowing the government by force.
"And examining 26 CFR 1.861-8T, the regulations that cover how to compute taxable income from sources within the US, we find at (d)(2)(iii) a list of what is not exempt from taxation, all of which are in regard to foreign, international, or possessions income."
What will you find if you look at 26CFR1.861? Right at the top:
Sec. 1.861-1 Income from sources within the United States.(a) Categories of income. Part I (section 861 and following), subchapter N, chapter 1 of the Code, and the regulations thereunder determine the sources of income for purposes of the income tax...
(1) Within the United States. The gross income from sources within the United States, consisting of the items of gross income specified in section 861(a) plus the items of gross income allocated or apportioned to such sources in accordance with section 863(a)...
And what is in 861(a)?
"Compensation for labor or personal services performed in the United States"
And none of those sections apply to income earned by US citizens working exclusively in the US.
Wrong again.
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.