The Liberty Tree Lantern

I am completely disgusted with nearly the entire Congress in both Houses.  I am sick and tired of RINOs spending money that the “Federal” Government doesn’t even have and constitutionally shouldn’t have.

 

According to the “enumerated” powers as written in the constitution there isn’t supposed to be a “Federal Reserve System” which is nothing more than a massive privately held company.  It is an abomination to the Constitution which has allowed the U.S. Government to grow heinously beyond that allotted by the founding documents that WE THE PEOPLE did ordain and establish.  The Federal Government has been usurping our power and illegally stealing our earnings through coercion, sometimes with violence, by constitutionally contemptuous means.  It has come to my attention that all three branches of the Government have largely conspired with each other in terms of certain measures being unconstitutionally foisted on me and my fellow countrymen.

 

I have been voting Republican for years because I so strongly believe in liberty.  But all you Federal RINOs have lost your way and have become weak to the trappings and ravages of power and corruption by big business and most especially the big bankers who privately own the Federal Reserve.  You use the Democrats as an excuse as to why taxes (many constitutionally illegal – US Supreme Court rulings in CHAS. C. STEWARD MACH. CO. v. DAVIS, 301 U.S. 548, 581-582(1937)) ,and [Brushaber v. Union Pacific Railroad, 240 U.S. 1 (1916)] (see below), are going or will be going up and as an excuse as to why we don’t even have the freedom to drill for our own domestic energy.  You point the finger at Democrats, not that they aren’t the major force of Socialism resulting in the equal distribution of misery being foisted on us, just that they are a convenient and obvious scapegoat, aren’t they?

 

Meanwhile you don’t have a single person running on FREEDOM (from Government) so that we can enjoy the prosperity and much lower energy prices that following the Constitution to the very word, intent and spirit, as meant on the day of it’s drafting, would provide.

 

Sir, The Federal Government has to massively shrink in size, scope and power over the American people and the State Governments have to duplicate services and become THE Independent, but united, States they were meant to be.  All the things that The Federal Government does, especially all regulations, have to be done on the State level so that there is competition and FREEDOM (from Government) and so we have somewhere to run when a State Government becomes over reaching and destroys the local economy, taxes too much, forcefully steals money and earned assets from individuals and gives it to others, makes too many restrictive laws, usurps our power as a free people or tries to take away our liberty.  The ninth and tenth amendments were enacted to ensure that The Federal Government would be an agent of the independent states, not the states an agent of the federal government, as you all so imply in both behavior and legislation.  And, I for one, have had it!

 

 

I am completely DONE, with the Republican Party.  You can go down to live in the abode of your dancing partner, the Devil of Socialism, of whom you are working to get us all into, you bastards!  At least Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid have the guts to admit their allegiance to their socialist ways.  You RINOs disgust me for the hypocrisy.

 

You will never get my money or support again!

 

I am going to support The Constitution party and Chuck Baldwin.  If we lose, what’s the difference if we reach the fires of socialist hell and despair of equality in poverty, quickly with Obama and his ilk, or slow and agonizingly with McCain and his?

 

 

 Information on Unconstitutional Income Taxes

Gearing a national income tax to the lowest common denominator is impractical. There would have been three alternatives for Congress at this time. The first would be to do nothing, which is what the Republicans preferred, they liked the high protective tariff system. The second would be to modify the direct taxation clauses of the Constitution to provide for a “direct” tax on incomes freed from apportionment. And the third would be to provide for an income tax of an “indirect” nature subject only to the rule of uniformity. What was done was the latter as the American People sought only to overturn the offensive parts of Pollock through the constitutional amendment process.

Thus it is well settled by the historical record that the purpose of the 16th Amendment was to overturn the Pollock Decision by way of a constitutional amendment. The purpose of this Amendment was not broader nor narrower than that. The Pollock Decision dealt with net income from real estate and personal property. The Pollock Decision did not deal with taxes on the gross revenue of a natural person. Having read all the Congressional debates on the income tax amendment, I can say that the intent of the Congress in presenting the several States with the 16th Amendment was only to overturn Pollock. As the Stanton Court 240 U.S. 103 (1916) said, “We are here dealing solely with the restriction imposed by the 16th Amendment …. from taking the income tax out of the class of indirect [taxes], to which it generically belongs, and putting it in the class of direct [taxes], to which it would not otherwise belong…” Taxes on net income are inherently indirect, taxes on gross income are inherently direct.

The People’s intention in supporting the 16th Amendment was honorable and justified. Unfortunately, its ambiguous terms would have offended a man like Thomas Jefferson who believed that government should be “bound with the chains of the Constitution.” We are blessed in that the Supreme Court did not construe the 16th Amendment in such a way as its critics had feared and as Senator Aldrich must have hoped. Both in the Brushaber Case and in the Stanton Case the Supreme Court held that the 16th Amendment created no new class of taxes, and that income taxes (on unearned income, gain or profit from business activity) were inherently indirect taxes. Whereas income taxes on wages and salaries are direct and required by the Constitution to be apportioned. Thus, the 16th Amendment did not give Congress any new power, nor did it create a new class of taxation, nor did it grant to Congress power to impose any type of direct tax without apportionment.

“We the People are the rightful masters,
both of Congress and the Courts,
not to overthrow the Constitution,
but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution.”
Abraham Lincoln