- The FF's had their hands tied when in came to the bill of rights. Most of the several States already had what was to become the "first" in their constitutions. The Bill of Rights was championed by the anti-feds.
- Permalink Reply by on
- That is true, in this case the anti-Federalists did the nation a great favor as it codified the limits and gave the people a clear understanding of just some of our right to protect us from a unjust government. Look how the Federal government has usurped the Constitution even with the bill of rights.
- Permalink Reply by on
- In other words groups with a common interest couldn't even become aware of themselves as a common interest group and then “act in unison with each other” on a continuous basis.
Reading #10, Jon, I don't get the sense that Madison was as focused on the communication aspect as you feel he does. It strikes me as being much more concerned with dispersal both geographic and cultural. After asserting that the creation of 'factions' is human nature he focuses on the best check on them; a large Republic being the best. Not due to the inability to communicate but rather the break up of power between regions. With strong State govt, local interests would trump power seeking factions; with a strong State govt the representatives would be hard pressed to form a broad power faction. To benefit a number of local interests, spread over a vast geographic and cultural landscape, would be quite difficult.
Obviously, this is all predicated on State sovereignty and States being represented at the federal level.
- Permalink Reply by on
- This is from a friend and I will share it with you all. copy it and send it to your friends and other posts.It is un-American to require citizens to purchase their rights from
government. It is un-American to force individuals to join unions.
It is un-American to dictate wages, prices, working conditions, and
benefits. It is un-American to legislate from the bench. It is
un-American to rule by decree using executive orders to circumvent the
legislative process. Forced equality of outcome is a fundamentally
un-American goal.
It is un-American to grant special government privileges to one group
at the expense of others. It is un-American to subsidize industries,
corporations, and technologies. It is un-American to tax some
citizens and not others. It is un-American to invade other nations
without a declaration of war. It is un-American to take from those
who earned and give to those who did not. Redistribution of wealth is
the primary objective of socialism; it is a particularly un-American
goal.
The Democratic Party has sold out entirely; the Republicans only
somewhat less so. Socialist government is like a grizzly bear mauling
and devouring everything it encounters. Democrats want to rile it up
and point it towards their successful neighbors, while Republicans
think they can potty train it to keep its crap out of their family
rooms. Libertarians want to kill it, or at least send it back to
Canada.
BTW un-American= Unconstitutional IMO
- Permalink Reply by on
- Beck is good for America, that being said: I generally agree with much he presents except IMO he is mixing many items into a porridge that I find distasteful. As You have seen from me in the Past - I have little fear of belief in the grand conspiracy theories. Are there bad people trying to destroy our way of life - yes; are there groups of these bad people trying to harm our nation - yes; are some of these groups inside America - yes; are some of these financed by Socialist leaning individuals - yes; are they big enough and powerful enough to do great harm to America and our Constitution - No; does our government need to expose these people as possible threats - yes; is there extremism on all sides of the spectrum - yes.He is doing the nation a service by exposing those that want to change our form of government and to destroy the Constitutional limits on the powers of the Federal government. As we all know this must be done for the education system even the Law Schools of the land do not teach strict Constitutional Republic law and the natural rights. We must reeducate the populous like the Founders did with the Federalist papers.
- Permalink Reply by on
- Its it congress that is destroying our nation, The vast majority of Treasury notes sold are being bought by the federal reserve, because no one else will buy them. The federal government is going broke, for this reason there is an opportunity to close Pandora's box and return to a constitutionally limited government. The nation will have no other choice. My hope is that when that happens we will be able to close some of the holes that congress has used to extend it powers beyond the limits imposed by the Constitution; The deliberate misinterpretation of the commerce clause, the general welfare clause, and the supremacy clause all of which has lead the nation to its downfall.
- Permalink Reply by on
- Other are still buying Treasuries only the are buying the longer bonds IMO as they hold a higher interest rate than the short term issues that the Fed is using to keep interest rates down.YOU will get no argument out of me regarding the commerce and the necessary and proper clause being usurped by the three branches of government. SCOTUS will be forced kicking and dragging into the review of these usurpation.It is important that all of us contact the political class and inform them of their usurpation. Write to the Justices and tell them, write to the editors and get it into the news. Using the media to pressure the SCOTUS to hold real hearings and review usurpation vs the FF and the Constitution. If we can succeed in getting a full and honest review then we have a chance to restore.
- Permalink Reply by on
- Here is tax theory that does not meet the Locke standard and I question if it meets the "TAKING" clause of the 5th amendment the four R plan - is it Consitutional or is it just more usurping? [see number two - direct conflict with the direct tax requirement to be per enumeration and in violation of the just compensation clause of the 5th as it it not equal in assessment or distribution?]
The Four "R"s
This section needs additional citations for verification.
Please help improve this article by adding reliable references. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (January 2010)
This section's factual accuracy is disputed. Please help to ensure that disputed facts are reliably sourced. See the relevant discussion on the talk page. (February 2011) Taxation has four main purposes or effects: Revenue, Redistribution, Repricing, and Representation.[citation needed]- The main purpose is revenue: taxes raise money to spend on armies, roads, schools and hospitals, and on more indirect government functions like market regulation or legal systems.
- A second is redistribution. Normally, this means transferring wealth from the richer sections of society to poorer sections.
- A third purpose of taxation is repricing. Taxes are levied to address externalities; for example, tobacco is taxed to discourage smoking, and a carbon taxdiscourages use of carbon-based fuels.
- A fourth, consequential effect of taxation in its historical setting has been representation. The American revolutionary slogan "no taxation without representation" implied this: rulers tax citizens, and citizens demand accountability from their rulers as the other part of this bargain. Studies have shown thatdirect taxation (such as income taxes) generates the greatest degree of accountability and better governance, while indirect taxation tends to have smaller effects.[3][4]
[edit]
- Permalink Reply by on
- "Studies have shown thatdirect taxation (such as income taxes) generates the greatest degree of accountability and better governance"is it something I should readily understand but don't? my bias against the residuals of income tax may be blinding me to the obvious?
- Permalink Reply by on
- Larry, look at the 16th amendment [no statement to permit a "PROGRESSIVE" tax rate] to tax income with no requirement for enumeration as "DIRECT" taxes are required under Article I section 8 - I am the only one seeing the conflict and the apparent usurpation. They are not allowed to TAKE from taxpayer A at a higher percentage so that some can be given to taxpayer B without JUST COMPENSATION. Humm I find no mention what so ever of REDISTRIBUTION.The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;5thnor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.16thThe Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.
- Permalink Reply by on
- "When government acts in excess of its lawful powers, than liberty is at stake."Justus Kennedy: Bond v. United States 2011
- Permalink Reply by on
- "Federalism has more than one dynamic. It is true that the federal structure serves to grant and delimit the prerogatives and responsibilities of the States and the National Government vis-à-vis one another. The allocation of powers in our federal system preserves the integrity, dignity, and residual sovereignty of the States. The federal balance is, in part, an end in itself, to ensure that States function as political entities in their own right."Justus Kennedy: Bond v. United States 2011In other wordsThe Tenth Amendment explicitly states the Constitution's principle of federalism by providing that powers not granted to the federal government nor prohibited to the statesby the Constitution are reserved, respectively, to the states or the people.
No comments:
Post a Comment