Privacy guaranteed - Your email is not shared with anyone.
Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'The Okie Corral' started by hammerkill, May 1, 2012.
All Americans pays taxes.
I agree with just about all Libertarian positions; unfortunately we will never see them become reality so I would not waste a lot of time on it.
For Libertarians to prevail, Government would have to relinquish meaningful power and that has never happened without revolution.
In a New York minute. In that order, too.
Shouldn't they pay equal dollar amounts, what with all the equal rights and priviliges?
Where do the feds get it in the first place?
I think Social Security needs reform. Like the Government leaving their hands off of it and stop borrowing against it.
The drug laws don't need repealed, they need to be stiffer.
(I know some of you won't agree but I make no apology for my belief on this.)
Almost all foreign aid needs cut off. I say almost because there are those issues from time to time that any nation with morals and ethics can't ignore.
We will always need some form of taxation, but Property tax needs to go away for ever. Government waste needs cut out.
We need mandatory term limits in congress.
We need to close the borders and deport all non-citizen aliens and those not in country legally.
The ability to speak, read and write English fluently needs to be a enforced requirement for citizenship. (If it already is, you could have fooled me.)
We need to clean house in the prisons. Dispose of the lifers and put the other ones to work. Make them pay to stay.
Take the hand cuffs off of our military and let them do their job when called upon.
Bring the manufacturing base back to America, get off of foreign oil and become self reliant.
When all of the above is complete, finish up by extending our collective middle finger to the rest of the world and tell them, "We don't need you and we don't want you."
And keep your Socialism and Marxist ways on your side of the pond!
Well, technically that isn't written into the constitution. The Supreme Court interpreted to right to counsel to include a free government-appointed lawyer during the 20th century and didn't even do it all at once.
Wikipedia cites: "Powell v. Alabama, 287 U.S. 45 (1932) ("special circumstances" in capital cases); Johnson v. Zerbst, 304 U.S. 458 (1938) (all federal cases); Betts v. Brady, 316 U.S. 455 (1942) (“special circumstances” in non-capital cases); Hamilton v. Alabama, 368 U.S. 52 (1961) (all capital cases); Gideon v. Wainwright, 372 U.S. 335 (1963) (all felony cases), overruling Betts, 316 U.S. 455; Argersinger v. Hamlin, 407 U.S. 25 (1972) (all actual imprisonment); Alabama v. Shelton, 535 U.S. 654 (2002) (suspended sentences)."
Like many other things, if the founders intended it to be government paid attorneys, it sure wasn't in their lifetimes - just the right to hire one and have him represent you.
It ends by stating the fundamental purpose of civilized society/government. Not sure you can call that socialism to any greater extent than all government is socialism.
Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine
90% of the Federal Government.
SS, Medicare, income tax, war on drugs, gun control, plus anything that has snuck in using the commerce loophole of the constitution (that would be rephrased to absolutely limit the Federal role to mediating interstate trade issues).
Basically if a local community things government action is needed then then they can do it. The Federal governments role is to mediate disputes between the states, provide for the common defense and regulate trade (both interstate and international).
I am not against international involvement, but only when it serves the direct interests of the USA. We need a strong Navy/Marine Corp to protect our international interests, but the Army/AirForce should be broken up and returned to the states.
what would haft baked neo-cons, rinos and undercover marxist keep?
Refer to Certifiedfund's post.
Basically, taxation with ADEQUATE representation.
If you're paying a total of 300$ in sales tax each year, from the money you make off welfare, while Lawyer John Doe is paying 20k+ in federal income tax alone, then the welfare queen shouldn't be allowed to vote, or have the same representation under his vote, all this does is open up politicians who are bribed with votes to rob another person of their riches.
It is constitutionally, and morally WRONG.
Thanks for pointing that out. I guess I've been indoctrinated and under the assumption a lawyer being appointed for you by the state was how it's always been. Glad to hear otherwise.
No surprise there but I'm curious: What parts of our "agenda" do you find objectionable or contrary to the founding principles?
Is it individual liberty, in general, that you object to?
Where does the fed get all that money for those programs?