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

Skip to comments.

Anti-Tax Group Makes 'Final Warning' to Federal Government
CNSNews.com ^ | November 15, 2002 | Michael L. Betsch

Posted on 11/15/2002 7:42:45 AM PST by H8DEMS

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 181-195 next last
To: Poohbah
And it plays right into the hands of the left. You just can't win that way.
21 posted on 11/15/2002 9:43:04 AM PST by general_re
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: general_re
"And it plays right into the hands of the left. You just can't win that way."

You got that right. Most Republicans believe in taxing everyone for their last nickle and giving absolute control over everything to the govenment just like the Democrats. At least the politicians they elect do. In that regard Democrats and Republicans are on the same team.

22 posted on 11/15/2002 9:54:19 AM PST by monday
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: general_re
And it plays right into the hands of the left. You just can't win that way.

Makes you wonder who's funding these nutballs, doesn't it?

23 posted on 11/15/2002 9:56:32 AM PST by Poohbah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Poohbah
You forgot one group.

People who think the constitution is a good thing, and would like the government to follow it. Strange how so few people believe that anymore, that those who do are considered extremists.

I guess America is, in a very real sense, not even America anymore. To most people, the constitution is a document that must be circumvented in order to get the power of government to do the bidding of whatever the special interest, pet project de jour is. Sad really.

24 posted on 11/15/2002 10:06:05 AM PST by monday
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: TonyRo76
"I'd gladly march with them to end the odious IRS and income tax."

Are you saying to end any form of federal income tax? If so, how would you propose to fund the activites of the federal government, e.g. the military? Hey, I'm all for getting rid of the IRS and reducing the tax burden, but it seems quite unrealistic to think we should do away with all taxes.

25 posted on 11/15/2002 10:14:29 AM PST by MEGoody
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: FlaFreedom
There's no need to change the code, because the income tax and its regulations do not impose the tax on intrastate commerce.
26 posted on 11/15/2002 10:16:10 AM PST by mvpel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: MrB; Poohbah; Dog Gone
Wasn't the income tax instituted by the NWO when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor?
27 posted on 11/15/2002 10:20:40 AM PST by Chancellor Palpatine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: monday
People who think the constitution is a good thing, and would like the government to follow it. Strange how so few people believe that anymore, that those who do are considered extremists.

I think the Constitution is a good thing, very much so, and would like the government to follow it. But the people who follow that up with "or else" are extremists. Nothing is gained by that kind of language, and much is lost.

28 posted on 11/15/2002 10:21:56 AM PST by general_re
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: mvpel
The income tax is imposed on income. Intra-state or inter-state, either way.
29 posted on 11/15/2002 10:23:46 AM PST by mlo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: wimpycat; Howlin
Flag to poohbah's #19.
30 posted on 11/15/2002 10:24:02 AM PST by Chancellor Palpatine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: general_re
Respectfully, I do not agree. The second amendment is there for a reason.
How many times do we need to ask nicely for the constitution to be adhered to?
31 posted on 11/15/2002 10:29:01 AM PST by KEVLAR
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Chancellor Palpatine
Wasn't the income tax instituted by the NWO when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor?

LOL, close. It was instituted by Woodrow Wilson after he charged up San Juan Hill during the Battle of the Bulge. It was one his famous Fourteen Points, I think, unless maybe it was one George HW Bush's Thousand Points of Light.

If I'm recalling my history correctly, that is.

32 posted on 11/15/2002 10:31:11 AM PST by Dog Gone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: KEVLAR
Respectfully, I do not agree. The second amendment is there for a reason. How many times do we need to ask nicely for the constitution to be adhered to?

Make up your mind. Are you going to continue working within the present system, or are you going to step outside it and engage in armed revolt?

You're not allowed the luxury of being on both sides of the fence at once. Once you start down the road of armed rebellion, you have two choices: victory or death.

Now, which one is it?

If you're going to work within the system, you have to distance yourself from folks like Stanley.

If you're going to engage in armed revolt, then Free Republic ain't the site for you.

33 posted on 11/15/2002 10:33:35 AM PST by Poohbah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: KEVLAR
Respectfully, I do not agree.

Fair enough. ;)

The second amendment is there for a reason. How many times do we need to ask nicely for the constitution to be adhered to?

What good does it do to embark on a quest you can't possibly win? What is the "or else" intended to stand for? "Or else we'll all go out and get shot while resisting arrest"? How does that advance that cause you want to promote?

You can't win by violent means, and in attempting to do so, you can only marginalize your cause even more. Forget about asking the government to see things your way, and concentrate on getting your fellow citizens to see things your way. Do that, and the problem solves itself.

34 posted on 11/15/2002 10:36:01 AM PST by general_re
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: H8DEMS
Who wrote this crappy article? Without explaining the motives of the protesters it jumps directly in to an ADL "response" about how extreme this group and it's views are. Could I at least hear for myself what is so bad before being told what to think about it?
35 posted on 11/15/2002 10:36:39 AM PST by Freakazoid
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Poohbah
Not to suggest that the people in this article are particularly representative of libertarians, but this is why I can't ever be a libertarian, no matter how sympathetic I am to libertarianism's goals - pragmatists are simply not welcome, from what I can see. Ideological purity trumps actual progress virtually every time.
36 posted on 11/15/2002 10:40:03 AM PST by general_re
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: SAJ
The United States were organized in 1783 under the Articles of Confederation. These were poorly drawn and weren't effective, as became evident almost immediately, and the Constitution was subsequently drafted in convention in 1787 and ratified in 1789.

A few minor corrections ...

The Articles of Confederation were drafted in July 1776, same month as the Declaration. But the Continental Congress rejected it as creating too strong a government! Back to committee for some very minor tinkering. Finished up a year or so later, and quickly ratified by all but 2 states, and those 2 ratified in 1781, when the Articles became official. (The big holdup was getting NY and Virginia to give up their western claims, which is where the Northwest Territory came from.) Anyway, as a practical matter, we operated under the Articles from 1776 until the Constitution was ratified in 1789, and Geo. Washington was sworn in. (He became roughly the 10th man to hold the title "President of the United States," as there were several presidents elected at least annually by Congress under the Articles.)

The Articles weren't poorly drawn. They did just what they were supposed to do, and were exactly the constitution that the Founders wanted us to have. But they didn't create the kind of government that Federalists like Hamilton wanted. So here we are.

37 posted on 11/15/2002 10:42:29 AM PST by PatrickHenry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: mlo
Actually, the income tax is imposed on taxable income.

And taxable income is gross income minus deductions, and gross income is defined as income from a source, and income from sources is defined in §861 of the statutes and regulations for income from sources within the US. And 26 CFR § 1.861-8(f)(1) does not have any subparagraphs that apply to the average US citizen.

38 posted on 11/15/2002 10:43:03 AM PST by mvpel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Poohbah
I am not a "militia of one".
I am not suicidal.
I will be ready, willing, and able to fight for what I believe in when the time comes.
My comment was in response to the "or else" making one an extremeist.
The second amendment says "or else" all by itself without anyone uttering a word.
You did not answer the question I asked.
39 posted on 11/15/2002 10:43:54 AM PST by KEVLAR
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Chancellor Palpatine
Wasn't the income tax instituted by the NWO when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor?

Forget it - you're on a roll ...

40 posted on 11/15/2002 10:44:41 AM PST by strela
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 181-195 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