In a Constitutional Republic, the basic rules governing the Government are found in a written document...the Constitution. In our Republic, to change the basic rules requires two-thirds of both Houses of Congress plus approval of three-fourths of the States. The only other legal way to change the basic rules is to call a Constitutional Convention. That's one of the reasons that our form of government is not a Democracy---it takes more than a simple majority to change the basic rules that govern the supposedly servant Government.
Unfortunately, as I've illustrated in previous posts, Establishment politicians (influenced by billionaire corporatists) have abrogated our Constitution and passed laws in areas for which there is no delegation of power to the central Government by the Constitution. In other words, the Constitution is bypassed...and the laws are unconstitutional, that is, those laws which deal in areas for which there is no delegated Constitutional authority. This combination of politics and corporatism is the classic definition of Fascism. In plain language, billionaires buy the votes of politicians...often for the benefit of certain industries, but sometimes for altruistic reasons. Some members of the Corporatocracy (e.g., David Rockefeller) actually believe that they can save the world via Globalism. Our Constitution gets in the way---because it limits what the Fed Govt can do---so everyone simply ignores it.
The Courts are part of the Corporatocracy, so very few unconstitutional laws are ever struck down. The cost to a private citizen of challenging any particular law is generally prohibitive, so again, very few unconstitutional laws are challenged.
Some people ask how one can know if a law is unconstitutional or not. They assume that the issue is so complex that only attorneys, judges, and justices can make such a determination. They cite the fact that the Supreme Court is the ultimate arbiter of constitutionality, so it must be extremely complicated. It is not complicated; 99.999999999999% of the Constitution is plainly written. The problem is that almost no American adults have bothered to study it, at least not since ninth grade American Government class.
The limits on the central Government are clear. Any power not stated, not delegated to the central Government, is reserved (by default) to the States by the Tenth Amendment. Thus, by simply reading the Constitution one can determine that the Fed Govt has absolutely no business whatsoever in (for example) the field of Education. The power to deal in that area is reserved to the States by the last item in the Bill of Rights. There is nothing complicated about it. The same applies to dozens and dozens of other areas---areas in which our central Government has no Constitutional authority, but has passed laws dealing with those areas anyway.
I personally know people who think there is nothing wrong with any of that. In fact, they plainly state that we no longer have a Republic---that the conversion to a Democracy has happened, and they are very pleased about the whole thing. Luckily, there are still folks like me who believe that the Republic should be restored...a lot of folks.
But how---how do we restore our Constitutional Republic...short of violent revolution? It will take time, effort, as much money as each can afford, and dedication. Two excellent starting points are found at:
http://www.givemeliberty.org/ and
http://www.freedomtofascism.com/ .
Another excellent source is: http://www.originalintent.org/edu (see left side of page).
If each of us does not do something, we have no one to blame but ourselves. In the past we were complacent, not vigilant. We allowed the Corporate Globalists to buy our politicians, and we kept electing the same Establishment politicos who most likely will never truly reform campaign financing and most likely will never vote in term limits. We believed that there were significant differences between Republicans and Democrats---there aren't. Except for a very few (e.g., Ron Paul), they are Elitists who are interested in nothing but getting re-elected. Kick the bums out!
Now is the time to stop being complacent. If we work long and hard, then we can restore our Republic; but it won't be easy. It will take education, and action in the form of civil disobedience. It will take dedication and patience.
If you want to start now, go to http://www.givemeliberty.org/ and sign the Petitions for Redress. Then sign up for email alerts, there and at http://www.freedomtofascism.com/ . Get educated relative to the Income Tax, Jury Nullification, the Constitution, Federal Jurisdiction, etc. at http://www.originalintent.org/ . In short, take action---do something.
Wednesday, May 2, 2007
Saturday, April 28, 2007
Are You an Employee According to the Tax Code?
The definitions for "employee" are found in Title 26> Subtitle C> chapter 24> Section 3401. Confirm with the link provided below.
1. Employment Taxes (Subtitle C)
TITLE 26 > Subtitle C—Employment TaxesCHAPTER 21—FEDERAL INSURANCE CONTRIBUTIONS ACTCHAPTER 22—RAILROAD RETIREMENT TAX ACTCHAPTER 23—FEDERAL UNEMPLOYMENT TAX ACTCHAPTER 23A—RAILROAD UNEMPLOYMENT REPAYMENT TAXCHAPTER 24—COLLECTION OF INCOME TAX AT SOURCE ON WAGESCHAPTER 25—GENERAL PROVISIONS RELATING TO EMPLOYMENT TAXES
2. Collection of Taxes at the source on wages (Chapter 24)
TITLE 26 > Subtitle C > CHAPTER 24—COLLECTION OF INCOME TAX AT SOURCE ON WAGES§ 3401. Definitions§ 3402. Income tax collected at source§ 3403. Liability for tax§ 3404. Return and payment by governmental employer§ 3405. Special rules for pensions, annuities, and certain other deferred income§ 3406. Backup withholding[§§ 3451 to 3456. Repealed.]
3. 3401 (definitions)...
3401 (c) Employee
(c) Employee For purposes of this chapter, the term “employee” includes an officer, employee, or elected official of the United States, a State, or any political subdivision thereof, or the District of Columbia, or any agency or instrumentality of any one or more of the foregoing. The term “employee” also includes an officer of a corporation.
Are YOU an employee?
See: http://www.article1-taxation.com/verify.html
1. Employment Taxes (Subtitle C)
TITLE 26 > Subtitle C—Employment TaxesCHAPTER 21—FEDERAL INSURANCE CONTRIBUTIONS ACTCHAPTER 22—RAILROAD RETIREMENT TAX ACTCHAPTER 23—FEDERAL UNEMPLOYMENT TAX ACTCHAPTER 23A—RAILROAD UNEMPLOYMENT REPAYMENT TAXCHAPTER 24—COLLECTION OF INCOME TAX AT SOURCE ON WAGESCHAPTER 25—GENERAL PROVISIONS RELATING TO EMPLOYMENT TAXES
2. Collection of Taxes at the source on wages (Chapter 24)
TITLE 26 > Subtitle C > CHAPTER 24—COLLECTION OF INCOME TAX AT SOURCE ON WAGES§ 3401. Definitions§ 3402. Income tax collected at source§ 3403. Liability for tax§ 3404. Return and payment by governmental employer§ 3405. Special rules for pensions, annuities, and certain other deferred income§ 3406. Backup withholding[§§ 3451 to 3456. Repealed.]
3. 3401 (definitions)...
3401 (c) Employee
(c) Employee For purposes of this chapter, the term “employee” includes an officer, employee, or elected official of the United States, a State, or any political subdivision thereof, or the District of Columbia, or any agency or instrumentality of any one or more of the foregoing. The term “employee” also includes an officer of a corporation.
Are YOU an employee?
See: http://www.article1-taxation.com/verify.html
Wednesday, April 25, 2007
McCain...Just Another Statist
Today John McCain made his bid for the Presidency official by formally announcing that he will seek the office in the next national election. Why would anyone who believes in a Constitutional Republic support him?
It would be nice if Republican voters would realize at last that Republicans (in general) are simply a different side of the same Statist coin. The Republican Party recently has given us more Big Government and Big Spending by (among other things) creating the largest Executive Branch Department in our country's history (Homeland Security), and by generating monstrous budget deficits.
Once McCain lost the bitterly fought Presidential primary (in 2000) to King George, he became just another Party sycophant. His opposition to Bush melted away and he tagged along with the King like a whipped dog. It truly was sickening.
McCain is among the majority who believe that the Executive can put the country at war without a Congressional Declaration of War, merely a Congressional "resolution". That's not what the Constitution says. Those who believe that we should be able to go to war without a Declaration of War need to lobby for a Constitutional Amendment. But the Statists in both major parties won't do that---because they know that the Amendment would never pass. So instead, they simply bypass the Constitution. This has been going on ever since the Korean War, which by the way, was officially known as the Korean "Conflict"...just a sleazy way to make it appear to be Constitutional. The same was true of the Vietnam "Conflict".
I still remember McCain responding to a question about the Declaration of War issue from Jesse Jackson, Jr.---in a town hall type campaign meeting---by saying (paraphrased) something like, "That's not true [that we need a formal Declaration of War], it has been done several times in the past without a Declaration.". Unfortunately, Congressman Jackson did not follow up with something such as, "That doesn't make it Constitutional.".
The Republi-Crats (Republicans and Democrats) have abrogated the Constitution via Legislative Absolutism. In general, they are nothing more than professional, Establishment Statists who think that Big Government is a necessity; the only thing they really are interested in is getting re-elected.
What if they gave an election...and no one showed up?
It would be nice if Republican voters would realize at last that Republicans (in general) are simply a different side of the same Statist coin. The Republican Party recently has given us more Big Government and Big Spending by (among other things) creating the largest Executive Branch Department in our country's history (Homeland Security), and by generating monstrous budget deficits.
Once McCain lost the bitterly fought Presidential primary (in 2000) to King George, he became just another Party sycophant. His opposition to Bush melted away and he tagged along with the King like a whipped dog. It truly was sickening.
McCain is among the majority who believe that the Executive can put the country at war without a Congressional Declaration of War, merely a Congressional "resolution". That's not what the Constitution says. Those who believe that we should be able to go to war without a Declaration of War need to lobby for a Constitutional Amendment. But the Statists in both major parties won't do that---because they know that the Amendment would never pass. So instead, they simply bypass the Constitution. This has been going on ever since the Korean War, which by the way, was officially known as the Korean "Conflict"...just a sleazy way to make it appear to be Constitutional. The same was true of the Vietnam "Conflict".
I still remember McCain responding to a question about the Declaration of War issue from Jesse Jackson, Jr.---in a town hall type campaign meeting---by saying (paraphrased) something like, "That's not true [that we need a formal Declaration of War], it has been done several times in the past without a Declaration.". Unfortunately, Congressman Jackson did not follow up with something such as, "That doesn't make it Constitutional.".
The Republi-Crats (Republicans and Democrats) have abrogated the Constitution via Legislative Absolutism. In general, they are nothing more than professional, Establishment Statists who think that Big Government is a necessity; the only thing they really are interested in is getting re-elected.
What if they gave an election...and no one showed up?
Wednesday, April 18, 2007
National "Truck Out Rally": April 23-25
This national civil disobedience event is in protest of the Trans-Texas Corridor (which will run from Mexico to Canada) and the proposed North American Union. The rally will be April 23, 24, and 25, 2007, and will occur in DC, every State capitol, and on as many freeways around the nation as there are participants who will make it possible. Details are found at: http://www.saveamericafund.org/ .
The idea is for truckers (and others) to line up abreast and roll slowly, while displaying banners and placards with messages such as "Stop the N.A.U.", "Protect America's Sovereignty", etc. The event is being endorsed and promoted by Aaron Russo's "America: Freedom to Fascism" (AFTF) organization, which has issued its first "digital video alert" or call to action. See the message on Google at: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4702879741158038990 .
The hope is that a truckers' slow roll will tie up traffic, garner mainstream media attention, and let Americans know about the Trans-Texas Corridor (which will be eighteen lanes wide, consisting of roadways and pipeline routes) and the North American Union plans. The Fed Govt., of course, denies that there are any plans for the N.A.U.
It will be interesting to see how the protest plays out, and whether or not it is significant enough to gain the attention of the homogenized, mainstream, corporate media. Unfortunately, without the homogenized media's coverage, most Americans will never know anything about the N.A.U. and its danger to American sovereignty. The N.A.U. is something on which we or our representatives will never get to vote. Not that voting matters when it comes to Globalization...keep in mind that even though the European Union was voted down in most affected countries, it was implemented anyway.
The idea is for truckers (and others) to line up abreast and roll slowly, while displaying banners and placards with messages such as "Stop the N.A.U.", "Protect America's Sovereignty", etc. The event is being endorsed and promoted by Aaron Russo's "America: Freedom to Fascism" (AFTF) organization, which has issued its first "digital video alert" or call to action. See the message on Google at: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4702879741158038990 .
The hope is that a truckers' slow roll will tie up traffic, garner mainstream media attention, and let Americans know about the Trans-Texas Corridor (which will be eighteen lanes wide, consisting of roadways and pipeline routes) and the North American Union plans. The Fed Govt., of course, denies that there are any plans for the N.A.U.
It will be interesting to see how the protest plays out, and whether or not it is significant enough to gain the attention of the homogenized, mainstream, corporate media. Unfortunately, without the homogenized media's coverage, most Americans will never know anything about the N.A.U. and its danger to American sovereignty. The N.A.U. is something on which we or our representatives will never get to vote. Not that voting matters when it comes to Globalization...keep in mind that even though the European Union was voted down in most affected countries, it was implemented anyway.
Tuesday, April 10, 2007
Congress...On the Income Tax
Pay particular attention to # (8).
In 2002, HR 2525 entitled The Fair Tax Act, began with these words, "Congress finds [emphasis added] that the Federal income tax: (1) retards economic growth and has reduced the standard of living of the American public; (2) impedes the international competitiveness of United States industry; (3) reduces savings and investment in the United States by taxing income multiple times [emphasis added]; (4) slows the capital formation necessary for real wages to steadily increase; (5) lowers productivity; (6) imposes unacceptable and unnecessary administrative and compliance costs on individual and business taxpayers; (7) is unfair and inequitable; (8) unnecessarily intrudes upon the privacy and civil rights of United States citizens [emphasis added]; (9) hides the true cost of government by embedding taxes in the costs of everything Americans buy; (10) is not being complied with at satisfactory levels and therefore raises the tax burden on law abiding citizens; and (11) impedes upward social mobility."
Above are the findings of CONGRESS. Ask yourself, are they not in basic agreement with the Tax Honesty Movement? The fact is, not even our Government believes in the Individual Income Tax anymore. The charade must end.
In 2002, HR 2525 entitled The Fair Tax Act, began with these words, "Congress finds [emphasis added] that the Federal income tax: (1) retards economic growth and has reduced the standard of living of the American public; (2) impedes the international competitiveness of United States industry; (3) reduces savings and investment in the United States by taxing income multiple times [emphasis added]; (4) slows the capital formation necessary for real wages to steadily increase; (5) lowers productivity; (6) imposes unacceptable and unnecessary administrative and compliance costs on individual and business taxpayers; (7) is unfair and inequitable; (8) unnecessarily intrudes upon the privacy and civil rights of United States citizens [emphasis added]; (9) hides the true cost of government by embedding taxes in the costs of everything Americans buy; (10) is not being complied with at satisfactory levels and therefore raises the tax burden on law abiding citizens; and (11) impedes upward social mobility."
Above are the findings of CONGRESS. Ask yourself, are they not in basic agreement with the Tax Honesty Movement? The fact is, not even our Government believes in the Individual Income Tax anymore. The charade must end.
Tuesday, April 3, 2007
More on Legislative Absolutism
In a landmark Supreme Court case involving legislation beyond what is Constitutionally authorized, Justice Harlan issued a powerful dissent. Below is a portion of it, taken from Downes v. Bidwell, 182 US 244 (1901).
"The idea prevails with some, indeed it has found expression in arguments at the bar, that we have in this country substantially two national governments; one to be maintained under the Constitution, with all of its restrictions; the other to be maintained by Congress outside and independent of that instrument, by exercising such power as other nations of the earth are accustomed to…I take leave to say that, if the principles thus announced should ever receive the sanction of a majority of this court, a radical and mischievous change in our system of government will result. We will, in that event, pass from the era of constitutional liberty, guarded and protected by a written constitution into an era of legislative absolutism…IT WILL BE AN EVIL DAY FOR AMERICAN LIBERTY IF THE THEORY OF A GOVERNMENT OUTSIDE THE SUPREME LAW OF THE LAND FINDS LODGEMENT IN OUR CONSTITUTIONAL JURISPRUDENCE. No higher duty rests upon this court than to exert its full authority to prevent all violations of the principles of the Constitution." [emphasis in original]
For the last 100 years it has been "an evil day for American liberty", just as Justice Harlan predicted. Legislative Absolutism intrudes into almost all aspects of our lives, via national laws involving powers not delegated to the central Government by the Constitution. For some odd reason, most Americans actually believe that Congress can pass any law it so desires; and that it is up to the Supreme Court to strike down laws that are unconstitutional. The second half of that last sentence is true, but the first half is not. Congress is limited by the Constitution.
Congress has no Constitutional authority to authorize funding for---just a few examples---items such as: education (billions of dollars); an indoor rainforest project in Iowa ($50 million); the International Fund for Ireland ($18.5 million); HUD (over $500 billion); or, the Food Stamp Program (billions of dollars). If the central government stayed within its Constitutional limits, then there would be no national debt imposing the hidden tax of inflation, and all government operations could be paid for with corporate taxes, excise taxes, duties, and imposts.
[NOTE: It is important for each individual to realize that consumers are the ones who pay Corporate taxes (in addition to the misapplied Individual Income Tax). The amount of the tax is proportionately built into the price of each product. How many times do you want to pay income taxes?!]
"The idea prevails with some, indeed it has found expression in arguments at the bar, that we have in this country substantially two national governments; one to be maintained under the Constitution, with all of its restrictions; the other to be maintained by Congress outside and independent of that instrument, by exercising such power as other nations of the earth are accustomed to…I take leave to say that, if the principles thus announced should ever receive the sanction of a majority of this court, a radical and mischievous change in our system of government will result. We will, in that event, pass from the era of constitutional liberty, guarded and protected by a written constitution into an era of legislative absolutism…IT WILL BE AN EVIL DAY FOR AMERICAN LIBERTY IF THE THEORY OF A GOVERNMENT OUTSIDE THE SUPREME LAW OF THE LAND FINDS LODGEMENT IN OUR CONSTITUTIONAL JURISPRUDENCE. No higher duty rests upon this court than to exert its full authority to prevent all violations of the principles of the Constitution." [emphasis in original]
For the last 100 years it has been "an evil day for American liberty", just as Justice Harlan predicted. Legislative Absolutism intrudes into almost all aspects of our lives, via national laws involving powers not delegated to the central Government by the Constitution. For some odd reason, most Americans actually believe that Congress can pass any law it so desires; and that it is up to the Supreme Court to strike down laws that are unconstitutional. The second half of that last sentence is true, but the first half is not. Congress is limited by the Constitution.
Congress has no Constitutional authority to authorize funding for---just a few examples---items such as: education (billions of dollars); an indoor rainforest project in Iowa ($50 million); the International Fund for Ireland ($18.5 million); HUD (over $500 billion); or, the Food Stamp Program (billions of dollars). If the central government stayed within its Constitutional limits, then there would be no national debt imposing the hidden tax of inflation, and all government operations could be paid for with corporate taxes, excise taxes, duties, and imposts.
[NOTE: It is important for each individual to realize that consumers are the ones who pay Corporate taxes (in addition to the misapplied Individual Income Tax). The amount of the tax is proportionately built into the price of each product. How many times do you want to pay income taxes?!]
Sunday, March 25, 2007
Modern Day Book Burning & Gestapo Tactics
Larken Rose is the young fellow who researched and made the video "Theft by Deception", which is available on the internet (I've referred everyone to it before). According to him, some time ago he, his wife, and their young daughter were subjected to an IRS "raid" on their home---armed men burst in yelling and pointing weapons, proceeded to rummage through all their belongings, and seized about 200-300 copies of his video. The same thing happened to his producer (and family). It should be added that Rose has not paid the Individual Income Tax for about ten years, and has dared the IRS to "show me [him] the law" and charge him with any "crime".
He was not charged with any crime, either before or after the raid. He was not even arrested. When he asked for the return of his video discs, he was told by the IRS that they will never be returned. [This, in the United States of America! Every sovereign individual should be outraged.]
This whole event is described toward the end of the piece below. [If you have dial-up, don't bother unless you can do chores while each section is loading!]
http://www.3rdear.com/861info/
Also presented in the video directly above was this bit---
In 2002, the Govt took in $767 billion dollars in taxes other than individual income taxes (in other words, the revenues were from corp taxes, excise taxes, SS taxes, Medicare taxes, duties, etc.). That same year, total Federal spending (not counting supplemental, or "off-budget", appropriations---such as the Iraq War) was $746 billion. [During the Reagan era, the Grace Commission issued a study showing that 100% of Individual Income Tax receipts went to paying the interest on the national debt. None of it went for "government services".]
He was not charged with any crime, either before or after the raid. He was not even arrested. When he asked for the return of his video discs, he was told by the IRS that they will never be returned. [This, in the United States of America! Every sovereign individual should be outraged.]
This whole event is described toward the end of the piece below. [If you have dial-up, don't bother unless you can do chores while each section is loading!]
http://www.3rdear.com/861info/
Also presented in the video directly above was this bit---
In 2002, the Govt took in $767 billion dollars in taxes other than individual income taxes (in other words, the revenues were from corp taxes, excise taxes, SS taxes, Medicare taxes, duties, etc.). That same year, total Federal spending (not counting supplemental, or "off-budget", appropriations---such as the Iraq War) was $746 billion. [During the Reagan era, the Grace Commission issued a study showing that 100% of Individual Income Tax receipts went to paying the interest on the national debt. None of it went for "government services".]
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)