Reply by doctorhugo on September 1, 2012 at 11:20am

If they said as you say they did and with great EMPHASIS too...

Oh, no Sir they said what they meant and meant what they said . . the Central Federal Government was to be weak and dependent on the States

...how would this "weak"  "Central Federal Government" police and enforce our borders or provide for our common defense on a national scale, not to mention any other menial responsibilities???

The "PREMISE" you accuse me of promoting is what is "FALSE".

I advocate for an "original intent" dedication to constitutional interpretation and have stated such MOST redundantly. Nothing more. What you imagine beyond that are just that...your imaginings Mangus.

• Message

Permalink Reply by Mangus Colorado on September 1, 2012 at 11:21am

Delete

Doc,

Read the Article I Section 8 enumerated powers 

Section 8. 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;

Notice the punctuation there are no periods that would separate these powers from the other 16 To:  LIMITED ENUMERATED POWERS.

Again you are wrong on the opinion and wrong on the facts - explain with you INTERPRETATIVE SKILLS why the FF &R put this protection in the 5th amendment . . 

nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Is that not a limit on taxes or TAKING? The only reason would be to protect property [money, land, businesses, wealth]. see John Locke and the Natural law where the desire to protect property was borrowed.

Permalink Reply by Mangus Colorado on September 1, 2012 at 11:26am

Delete

Atlas,

your so called COMMON FOLKS is insulting the citizens - the same very citizens pushed the Federal Government to make laws that are the issue today. All wanted Protections from all evil and to have a nanny State paying for the mistakes of the individual. 

Common folks of today are starting to come out from the coma of take care of me and moving towards leave me the hell alone. 

Good luck - LMASO

Permalink Reply by Mangus Colorado on September 1, 2012 at 11:34am

Delete

Doc.

your tax issue strawman has been put down many times and I did it again here - you fail to read the Document with out the bias of JUDICIAL REVIEW PROGRESSIVE LIVING CONSTITUTION BELIEF. 

You have been shown with quotes and language but you keep playing the Alinsky game of ignore the question and restate your desired result without PROOFS. You have zero language from the actual CONSTITUTION to support you view in fact I challange you to even find some language from a FF or R that would even lend a scintilla of authority to your way of approving a DEMOCRACY AND KILLING THE CONSTITUTIONAL LIMITS.

The reason you do not is because you can not . . Game on . . 

Permalink Reply by Atlas on September 1, 2012 at 11:41am

In regard to A1, S8;

The opening "clause", or parapgraph and the final paragraph bracket what the Congress can tax or legislate.

Each of those enable action on the items contained in the box. Nothing more or less. Those items are open to interpretation with an eye on the intent of the whole gig to start with.

IMO those authorities are pretty straightforward (unless a parser or slice/dice operation is performed on them to advance an agenda).

The exception and most ambiguous is the "commerce" clause, the scope of whch is always been debated from the beginning.

To Yangus ridiculous remark above: You have bamboozled and confused yourself friend - I was talking about Executive branch and you are going all "spagetti" on us - LMAO - You cant stay on a topic to save your life. You are all over the place man.