If "Our Creator" endowed us with rights...

I've proven the whole process, lol. Congress passed the amendment. The required number of state legislators ratified it. It is added to the constitution. you lose.

 

I've ignored nothing. I've conclusively proven your claim is abject nonsense.

strawman

 

This thread is not as importat as you seem to think it is.

 

I'm really not sure why you are posting all this stuff.

This is a TOTALLY dead issue. It's been adjudicated to finality.

And, as a practical matter there is no alternative. Killing our form of taxation without providing a SUPERIOR solution is not something that a sane or responsible individual interested in American success would EVER propose.

 

I asked you for improvements. You stated "FairTax". Now you want to back away. GREAT!!

I proposed voting improvements. And, it looks like you agree with that, given your youtube. Thanks! I promote my state's system of voting, which is exclusively by mail - completely dodging the criminal behavior that surrounds polling places - which is lightly touched on in your youbute.

In general, I'm down on complaining about America when it comes without specifics that we can do something about.

As Churchill said, "Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the others." Our fouders were insightful enough to make us a democracy, but we need to be constantly working toward resolving the issues of 1/3 billion people of all races all genders, all religions, all cultures trying to live together.

 

When it comes to law, daddy is the Supreme Court.

Who's your daddy?

 

No, the votes were not legitimate. What is this? Is this some kind of playground where you just keep saying is so every time the facts are presented? Are you THAT childish?

 

See that is where you lie. I've already quoted what you said and I prefaced my statements with the fact that I did not endorse the Fair Tax. Neither did I oppose it. AND I STATED MY OWN PROPOSAL IF THE OPPORTUNITY ARISES IN CONGRESS TO PRESENT IT.

Chruchill was not a founder or constiotutional framer of our country.



"Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There is never a democracy that did not commit suicide." John Adams, second president of the United States

 

In what case, since Aaron Russo put out that film, has the United States Supreme Court granted cert?

 

You continue to contradict yourself. What happened to that "representative democracy?" Now you see why John Adams said what he did. Thank you for confirming that you've been in error.

 

This thread is so important that you obsess over it, day and night.

 

I'm not sure why you would expect me to say anything different? It's an objective fact of reality that both amendments were ratified in full compliance with the constitution. It is a fact of reality that there is no way you can debate that. To claim they were not is moronic, batshit crazy, and demonstrably false.

 

youve shown no law, youve not proven any state even voted on it much less ratified anything, a vote tally proves nothing what so ever.

Yes 'composition fallacy' describes your strawman argument perfectly.

In languge anyone can easily understand your argument is demonstrably bullshit!

 

I gave you a list of votes BY STATE, showing the each ratified both amendments.

you have no idea what either of these words mean.

well, we know your claim is moronic, as we have both a 14th and 16th amendment as part of the constitution, lol.

 

constantly contradicts himself. Like I said in another thread people have a full time job correcting all the strawman garbage he posts.

 

yes you gave a bullshti tally, NOT procedural law, nothing to validate that tally is true, therefore demonstrably proving nothing other than your soapbox rant as usual.

 

Oh, yes - you proposed we go back to some pre-income tax system for federal revenue. But, you didn't describe anythig about how such a system would work today.

If you want to discuss that idea, go for it. Until then, I'm probably going to once again forget you said that.

As for Churchill, lot's of smart and very capable people weren't actually Americans.

And, yes - I doubt any of our framers thought the USA would last this long in the form that they created. Jefferson believed there would need to be revolutions every so often. Surely none of them could have contemplated today's population or economy.

 

And?

 

The easiest argument to understand is that if you look up our constitution you will find the 14th and 16th amendments sitting there in full form.

So, getting byond your process complaint, where do you think we should go from here?

 

you can start by acknowledging the facts and the actual record and concede the point.

 

Our government has three distinct parts - the court, the legislature and the executive.

Members of the legislature are directly elected - they are our representatives in this representative democracy.

We vote for the president through an obscure and totally separate system of reprsentation.

Other important positions are proposed by the president (who is democratically elected) and require confirmation by the Senate (which is democratically elected).

Our elected representatives in congress have rights of review of the executive branch as part of our system of checks and balances - one of the important and novel approaches our founders devised. Through that mechanism, our democratically elected representatives in congress may remove key individuals in the executive and judicial branches of government - including the president.


But, that is NOT what concerned Adams about our democracy. It's not what made other poliical analysts of the time (such as de Tocqueville) nervous about our democracy, either.

They were concerned that leadership positions could be won by those who achieved popular appeal, but had no experience, education, or incite in government, philosophy, etc. - EXACTLY what we have today! They saw this as suicide - as should we.

Yet like they suspected, we've had a number of serious presidential candidates who had never held ANY elective office, nor any other experience in government!! We've had candidates that are FAR more interested in persoal agrandizement than in pursuing the higher challenges of our founding documents. All that is required is for the population to reject those critical characteristics - reject that government actually can work, reject educated thought, forget what leadership actually is, etc. At that point, voters may well vote without even questioning what the characteristics of a successful president might be.

This is but one of the reasons that when we help establish new govenments, we do NOT propose our own.

 

Are you aware that our constitution includes the 14th and 16th amendments?

 

you are aware that your composition fallacy disqualifies your position?

 

You want acknowledgement of the facts - which sounds like a reasoable idea.

The fact of our constitution seems to be a starting point of critical importance.

Surely you can agree with that.

 

You are wrong and judges, lawyers, civil libertarians, historians, and other researchers continue to point it out. You're satisfied with the result ... for now. Once you find out the law doesn't favor what you want to believe in, you will look at both sides of the equation. That I promise you. Meanwhile, you are blowing smoke and you are factually wrong.