81

It is just as odious to reach into a rich man’s pockets to pay for unconstitutional largess and power grabs as to reach into a poor man’s pockets. Don’t imagine you will ever get a so-called progressive – who is in lust with the fruits of Arbitrary government and views spending as having a moral component to the point that even the merest suggestion government living within its means often seems to be viewed like some crime against humanity among them – to agree with you by using such terminology. I dare say you should not expect many “conservatives” who, holding to government as an ongoing concern rather than a constitutional entity, are by now eagerly conserving FDR’s high handed lawlessness and all that is built upon it to follow you either.

(Those certainly do not roll back “progressivism” when they win power, not even when they’ve been running on it.)

82

Rurudyne,

You are absolutely correct, at least in my mind, that it “. . . is just as odious to reach into a rich man’s pockets to pay for unconstitutional largess and power grabs as to reach into a poor man’s pockets.”

My emphasizing how such evil, as it relates to those whose station in life requires them to sell life itself to earn a wage to buy the necessities of life, and then have the property they have earned stolen from them by a direct and unconstitutional federal tax, is because I felt the disproportionate pain and suffering of such a notoriously evil tax, which robs the bread our laboring class citizens have earned.

Having said that, our wise and thoughtful founding fathers most certainly would agree with your statement I quoted above, which is self-evident judging from one of the most priceless principles they embedded in our Constitution ___ the liberty for our citizens to succeed or fail at their own hand and pursue their own happiness, without the hand of government intervening by establishing unequal laws, and especially so when it comes to unequal direct taxation which favors some at the expense of others!
In fact, one of our noteworthy Forefathers expanded on your premise as follows:

“Under a just and equal Government, every individual is entitled to protection in the enjoyment of the whole product of his labor, except such portion of it as is necessary to enable Government to protect the rest; this is given only in consideration of the protection offered. In every bounty, exclusive right, or monopoly, Government violates the stipulation on her part; for, by such a regulation, the product of one man’s labor is transferred to the use and enjoyment of another. The exercise of such a right on the part of Government can be justified on no other principle, than that the whole product of the labor or every individual is the real property of Government, and may be distributed among the several parts of the community by government discretion; such a supposition would directly involve the idea, that every individual in the community is merely a slave and bondsman to Government, who, although he may labor, is not to expect protection in the product of his labor. An authority given to any Government to exercise such a principle, would lead to a complete system of tyranny.” ___ See Representative Giles, speaking before Congress February 3rd, 1792

Is it not a fact we now live under a complete system of tyranny carried out under unequal law, and part of that unequal law includes “income taxation”, which tramples upon the original objectives and promises under which our Constitution was agreed to?

Certainly, there is no question that those today who are entrusted to support and defend our written constitution and its protections, have become atrociously evil and accustomed to applying the Humpty Dumpty theory of language when applying its provisions:

“When I use a word,” Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, “it means just what I choose it to mean- neither more nor less.”

“The question is,” said Alice, “whether you can make words mean so many different things.”

“The question is,” said Humpty Dumpty, “which is to be master-that’s all.”

JWK
“If the Constitution was ratified under the belief, sedulously propagated on all sides that such protection was afforded, would it not now be a fraud upon the whole people to give a different construction to its powers?”___ Justice Story

83

Rurudyne,

Speaking of folks in government [so-called progressives, and self-described conservatives] I’ve often wondered if our Congress critters were made to adhered to our Constitution and only spent federal revenue on the list of particulars found beneath Article 1, Section 8, Clause 1, ___ for which Congress is constitutionally limited to lay and collect taxes for ___ what would the annual decrease in millionaires created be, whose fortunes are directly traceable to Congress’s expenditures of taxpayer revenue from our federal treasury?

The unauthorized expansion of our federal government’s spending, has become quite profitable for some at the expense of others, and those “others” are certainly not America’s working class citizens who are constantly told how government is here to help them, and yet, their standard of living has been in rapid decline these last couple of years, and proportionately so to Congress’ spending.

JWK

There is no “humanitarian crisis” at our southern border as erroneously reported on Fox News. It is an outright invasion of the United States, intentionally orchestrated and perpetuated by the leadership of our tyrannical federal government which includes traitorous, judges, legislators, and our current president of the United States.