Not all, but most. Regarding your references to Kent State, having lived through that period and indirectly knowing people shot at Kent State (friend of a friend type of thing), I'll submit that you have no clue about Kent State. They did not do anything to desrve being shot. I have long maintained that when people woke up to find that the government was shooting their children, the end of the Vietnam war was inevitable. Kent State (and the much less publicized Jackson State) were the beginning of the end for the Vietnam war.

:thumb::thumb::thumb:

If I thought the people participating in the Tea Party stuff even had a clue what they were protesting, then I'd feel a lot better about it's effectiveness. I suspect most will take part because it's the "cool" thing to do.

 

So because they don't agree with the left, they don't have a clue what they are protesting?

 

Actually I always thought the democrat side was supposed to be "the cool side" and the republican side was the establishment.

They have the right to protest whatever they want. I don't agree with them and I don't think they will be successful because if you read some of the signs some talk about socialism some talk about taxation without representation, etc. What are they protesting exactly other than the party they don't support being in control?

I am for one glad to see this "tea" party stuff. I believe that ALL politicians have forgotten who they represent, with the exception of California. I have maintained and still maintain that the two party system has failed, hence my support for the Libertarian Party.

 

I do not think it is the government's responsibility to bail out a failed product. I do not think it is the government's responsibility to tell me what is moral and immoral.

I do think that tax money should be used as mandated in the Constitution.

I do think think that the Federal Income Tax is unconstitutional.

I do think that I think to much:D

I am for one glad to see this "tea" party stuff. I believe that ALL politicians have forgotten who they represent, with the exception of California. I have maintained and still maintain that the two party system has failed, hence my support for the Libertarian Party.

 

I do not think it is the government's responsibility to bail out a failed product. I do not think it is the government's responsibility to tell me what is moral and immoral.

I do think that tax money should be used as mandated in the Constitution.

I do think think that the Federal Income Tax is unconstitutional.

I do think that I think to much:D

 

What about the 16th amendment?

"The 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."

I am for one glad to see this "tea" party stuff. I believe that ALL politicians have forgotten who they represent, with the exception of California. I have maintained and still maintain that the two party system has failed, hence my support for the Libertarian Party.

 

I do not think it is the government's responsibility to bail out a failed product. I do not think it is the government's responsibility to tell me what is moral and immoral.

I do think that tax money should be used as mandated in the Constitution.

I do think think that the Federal Income Tax is unconstitutional.

I do think that I think to much:D

 

Just curious, and anyone can really answer this question with thier own opinion and interpretation.

 

How and where is tax moneys use mandated in the Constitution?

 

How does Federal Income Tax being unconstitutional fit in the 16th Amendment?

Just curious, and anyone can really answer this question with thier own opinion and interpretation.

 

How and where is tax moneys use mandated in the Constitution?

 

How does Federal Income Tax being unconstitutional fit in the 16th Amendment?

 

It was never ratified! It has been taken to court twice because of that little fact, and both times the courts have agreed with the plantiff, the ironic thing is that as it was moving up the court system to the Supreme Court, the plantiff went bankrupt:ohbrother:

 

I will get the constitution and show you what my interpretation is... as soon as I find the constitution.

[/b]

 

It was never ratified! It has been taken to court twice because of that little fact, and both times the courts have agreed with the plantiff, the ironic thing is that as it was moving up the court system to the Supreme Court, the plantiff went bankrupt:ohbrother:

 

I will get the constitution and show you what my interpretation is... as soon as I find the constitution.

You might be thinking of the 1894 tax passed by Congress that went to the Supreme Court, but the 16th Amendment was proposed by Conservatives as a poison pill to kill the Payne-Aldrich tariff bill. They never belived that 3/4ths of states would ratify it, buy that is what happend. It was ratified in Feb. 1915.

The Tea Parties will have no effect whatsoever in Washington. We are asking for DC to release some of the power it has obtained from the states and from us, and that just ain't going to happen. The only thing that would make a difference is an absolute slaughter of the incumbents on election day.

If I thought the people participating in the Tea Party stuff even had a clue what they were protesting, then I'd feel a lot better about it's effectiveness. I suspect most will take part because it's the "cool" thing to do.

 

I think you are confusing this "stuff" with all of those brainless demonstrations from the left usually attended by those with no means of self support. Still, it is unlikely that the tea parties will have a large participation. Unlike those who normally demonstrate, most all of those who would attend this protest are employed (ie: taxpayers) and will not be able to miss work.

If I thought the people participating in the Tea Party stuff even had a clue what they were protesting, then I'd feel a lot better about it's effectiveness. I suspect most will take part because it's the "cool" thing to do.

 

Kind of like a whole bunch of Obama voters. They had no clue about issues or where Obama stood but they voted for him because it was cool.

You might be thinking of the 1894 tax passed by Congress that went to the Supreme Court, but the 16th Amendment was proposed by Conservatives as a poison pill to kill the Payne-Aldrich tariff bill. They never belived that 3/4ths of states would ratify it, buy that is what happend. It was ratified in Feb. 1915.

 

This should help and point you into the direction of why I have stated what I have...

 

http://www.usconstitution.net/constnotes.html#Am16

 

 

By the way you can join the group it mentions, I would be more than happy to help you!

I think you are confusing this "stuff" with all of those brainless demonstrations from the left usually attended by those with no means of self support. Still, it is unlikely that the tea parties will have a large participation. Unlike those who normally demonstrate, most all of those who would attend this protest are employed (ie: taxpayers) and will not be able to miss work.

 

Kind of like a whole bunch of Obama voters. They had no clue about issues or where Obama stood but they voted for him because it was cool.

 

:puke: Seriously, liberal leaning people don't work and are clueless about issues. Is this the third grade?:ohbrother:

WOW. Where did you get that out of what I said?

 

1. Many (not all) Obama voters had no clue where he or any other candidate stood on issues, they voted for him simply because it was the "IN" thiong to do. To deny thst is to have ones head very deeply buried in the sand. Do you truly believe otherwise?

 

2. The post I quoted (from someone whose opinion I respect) made much the same assertation about the people that would be attending the so-called tea parties.

This should help and point you into the direction of why I have stated what I have...

 

http://www.usconstitution.net/constnotes.html#Am16

 

 

By the way you can join the group it mentions, I would be more than happy to help you!

(From the articles from the Straight Dops) I see the arugment that could be made by some, if in fact Ohio was not officially a state, they had no ratification vote. That argument however would hold no weight, as 42 other states also voted to ratify the 16th Amendment(even more than would be needed in 2009. Only 36 states were needed to ratify then)

 

As for the We the People site, I don't have time to look for the evidence that they present right now, but will soon and comment on that.