johnwk
08-21-2008, 07:22 AM
On Tuesday, August 19th, Mr. Obama, while addressing America’s Veterans of Foreign Wars asserted he will let no one question his love of America.
"I have never suggested and never will that Senator McCain picks his positions on national security based on politics and personal ambition," Obama said. "I have not suggested it because I believe he genuinely wants to serve America's national interests. Now it is time for him to acknowledge that I want to do the same. Let me be clear-I will let no one question my love of this country. I love America, so do you, and so does John McCain."
See: Obama to McCain - Don't challenge my patriotism (http://northdenvernews.com/content/view/1432/2/)
But when one claims to “love America” it is reasonable to conclude the person making that claim admires, supports and defends America’s written Constitution, which in fact defines what America is all about. And so, Obama’s patriotism and love for America is immediately called into question when examining various proposals he would institute if he were elected President.
Obama has proposed to use the force of federal taxation to finance an $18 billion federal education plan. The problem with Obama’s $18 billion federal education plan is, it would be a misappropriation of federal revenue, and, it proposes to exercise a federal regulatory power over a subject matter [public schools established under state constitutions] which the American people have not delegated to the federal government. Instead of Obama supporting and defending America’s written Constitution and focusing on the enumerated powers granted to Congress by our Constitution, he proposes to subjugate federalism, our Constitution’s plan, and wants to expand our federal government’s existing and despotic assumption of power within the various state borders.
Mr. Obama has also stated (http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/Politics/story?id=3225201) "As president, I will sign a universal health-care plan into law by the end of my first term in office."
This of course is another indication that Mr. Obama is a domestic enemy of America’s written Constitution; that he blatantly ignores the intentions and beliefs under which the people of the United States adopted our federal Constitution, and that he intends to be disobedient to and trash our Constitution’s Tenth Amendment which was specifically adopted by the people of the united States to restrict the federal government from meddling within the various state borders and asserting unauthorized power over the people’s lives, liberties and property.
But Obama’s proposed assault on our Constitution does not stop here. He also intends to violate the very core of our Constitution’s tax plan, a fair share formula written into our Constitution by our founding fathers to be observed if Congress should find imposts duties and excise taxes insufficient to meet Congress’s expenditures and calls directly upon the people within the various states to fill the national treasury. Obama’s tax-the-rich-disproportionately proposal is intentionally designed to carry out a Marxist idea “ from each according to their ability“. But this very idea was intentionally forbidden by our Constitution’s fair share formula for any general tax laid among the states. Let us review our history!
Under the Articles of Confederation which were in force during the framing and ratification of our existing Constitution, the national treasury was to be filled by a general tax among the states
in proportion to the value of all land within each state, granted to or surveyed for any Person, as such land and the buildings and improvements thereon shall be estimated according to such mode as the united states in congress assembled, shall from time to time direct and appoint.___ see Articles of Confederation.
During the framing of our existing Constitution this wealth based tax became a bone of contention. Delegates from States with superior wealth objected to having to carry a larger share of the federal tax burden than poorer states, and they argued that wealth was not a proper object from which to calculate each state’s share of a general tax among the states.
Eventually a compromise was reached [Article 1, Section 2, Clause 3] “Representatives and direct taxes shall be apportioned among the several States…….” The intention of this provision, contrary to the myth that it made Black’s 3/5ths of a person, was the creation of two rules: one determining each state’s voting strength in Congress, and a second rule to be applied if imposts, duties and miscellaneous excise taxes were insufficient to meet federal expenditures and Congress found it necessary to call upon the people directly to fill the national treasury in a general tax, and in particular, if the general tax was calculated from wealth such as that which may be calculated from the value of property, real and personal.
The two rules, considering subsequent amendments to our Constitution [1] may be represented as follows:
State`s Population
______________ X size of Congress (435) = State`s No.of votes in Congress
population of U.S.
State`s population
_________________ X SUM TO BE RAISED = STATE`S SHARE OF TAX
Total U.S. Population
Obama’s Marists “ from each according to their ability“ tax plan, as existing federal taxation now does, would subjugate the very intentions for which the rule of apportionment was adopted!
The intended protection was that those states contributing the lion’s share of a general tax among the states___ a primary tax to meet Congress’s expenditures laid within the various state borders and calculated from the value of people’s property, real and personal ___ would be compensated by a vote in Congress Assembled proportionately equal to their financial contribution___ a vote to be exercised in determining how their money would be spent by Congress!
Socialists and the friends of big government like Obama, are great at spending other people’s money and always demand the enforcement of the one man one vote part of our Constitution when it comes to spending from the federal treasury. But when it comes time to fill the national treasury in a tax which reaches people’s wealth, such as a tax calculated from a person’s real and personal property, they run and hide from the one vote one dollar part of our Constitution, which is also part of the apportionment formula and gave them their one man one vote.
Bottom line is, Obama does not love America as it is defined in her Constitution. His plan is to subjugate our constitutionally limited system of government, assume powers not granted to the federal government by our Constitution, and he wishes to sink the hooks of socialism in every state in our Union in defiance of our Constitution and its Tenth amendment. In short, Obama is a domestic enemy of our Constitution and the intentions and beliefs under which it was adopted.
[1] NOTE: The 16th Amendment did not change the constitutional rule for a general tax among the states calculated from the value of people’s property, real or personal. See, for example, BROMLEY v. MCCAUGHN, 280 U.S. 124 (1929) the Court states, well after the adoption of the 16th Amendment, and in crystal clear language: “As the present tax is not apportioned, it is forbidden, if direct.”
Regards,
JWK
Black working people who support Obama are absolutely correct when they say, as a general statement, “its all about the Benjamins”. But they seem to be easily conned into surrendering the “Benjamins“ they earn to "agents of change" who merely seek to change the faces of those holding political plum jobs within the inner circle of the Washington Establishment. Do black voters not realize they will be betrayed by Obama's "agents of change and remain tax slaves ___ useful to work and pay taxes to feed political plum job holders on our federal plantation?
"I have never suggested and never will that Senator McCain picks his positions on national security based on politics and personal ambition," Obama said. "I have not suggested it because I believe he genuinely wants to serve America's national interests. Now it is time for him to acknowledge that I want to do the same. Let me be clear-I will let no one question my love of this country. I love America, so do you, and so does John McCain."
See: Obama to McCain - Don't challenge my patriotism (http://northdenvernews.com/content/view/1432/2/)
But when one claims to “love America” it is reasonable to conclude the person making that claim admires, supports and defends America’s written Constitution, which in fact defines what America is all about. And so, Obama’s patriotism and love for America is immediately called into question when examining various proposals he would institute if he were elected President.
Obama has proposed to use the force of federal taxation to finance an $18 billion federal education plan. The problem with Obama’s $18 billion federal education plan is, it would be a misappropriation of federal revenue, and, it proposes to exercise a federal regulatory power over a subject matter [public schools established under state constitutions] which the American people have not delegated to the federal government. Instead of Obama supporting and defending America’s written Constitution and focusing on the enumerated powers granted to Congress by our Constitution, he proposes to subjugate federalism, our Constitution’s plan, and wants to expand our federal government’s existing and despotic assumption of power within the various state borders.
Mr. Obama has also stated (http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/Politics/story?id=3225201) "As president, I will sign a universal health-care plan into law by the end of my first term in office."
This of course is another indication that Mr. Obama is a domestic enemy of America’s written Constitution; that he blatantly ignores the intentions and beliefs under which the people of the United States adopted our federal Constitution, and that he intends to be disobedient to and trash our Constitution’s Tenth Amendment which was specifically adopted by the people of the united States to restrict the federal government from meddling within the various state borders and asserting unauthorized power over the people’s lives, liberties and property.
But Obama’s proposed assault on our Constitution does not stop here. He also intends to violate the very core of our Constitution’s tax plan, a fair share formula written into our Constitution by our founding fathers to be observed if Congress should find imposts duties and excise taxes insufficient to meet Congress’s expenditures and calls directly upon the people within the various states to fill the national treasury. Obama’s tax-the-rich-disproportionately proposal is intentionally designed to carry out a Marxist idea “ from each according to their ability“. But this very idea was intentionally forbidden by our Constitution’s fair share formula for any general tax laid among the states. Let us review our history!
Under the Articles of Confederation which were in force during the framing and ratification of our existing Constitution, the national treasury was to be filled by a general tax among the states
in proportion to the value of all land within each state, granted to or surveyed for any Person, as such land and the buildings and improvements thereon shall be estimated according to such mode as the united states in congress assembled, shall from time to time direct and appoint.___ see Articles of Confederation.
During the framing of our existing Constitution this wealth based tax became a bone of contention. Delegates from States with superior wealth objected to having to carry a larger share of the federal tax burden than poorer states, and they argued that wealth was not a proper object from which to calculate each state’s share of a general tax among the states.
Eventually a compromise was reached [Article 1, Section 2, Clause 3] “Representatives and direct taxes shall be apportioned among the several States…….” The intention of this provision, contrary to the myth that it made Black’s 3/5ths of a person, was the creation of two rules: one determining each state’s voting strength in Congress, and a second rule to be applied if imposts, duties and miscellaneous excise taxes were insufficient to meet federal expenditures and Congress found it necessary to call upon the people directly to fill the national treasury in a general tax, and in particular, if the general tax was calculated from wealth such as that which may be calculated from the value of property, real and personal.
The two rules, considering subsequent amendments to our Constitution [1] may be represented as follows:
State`s Population
______________ X size of Congress (435) = State`s No.of votes in Congress
population of U.S.
State`s population
_________________ X SUM TO BE RAISED = STATE`S SHARE OF TAX
Total U.S. Population
Obama’s Marists “ from each according to their ability“ tax plan, as existing federal taxation now does, would subjugate the very intentions for which the rule of apportionment was adopted!
The intended protection was that those states contributing the lion’s share of a general tax among the states___ a primary tax to meet Congress’s expenditures laid within the various state borders and calculated from the value of people’s property, real and personal ___ would be compensated by a vote in Congress Assembled proportionately equal to their financial contribution___ a vote to be exercised in determining how their money would be spent by Congress!
Socialists and the friends of big government like Obama, are great at spending other people’s money and always demand the enforcement of the one man one vote part of our Constitution when it comes to spending from the federal treasury. But when it comes time to fill the national treasury in a tax which reaches people’s wealth, such as a tax calculated from a person’s real and personal property, they run and hide from the one vote one dollar part of our Constitution, which is also part of the apportionment formula and gave them their one man one vote.
Bottom line is, Obama does not love America as it is defined in her Constitution. His plan is to subjugate our constitutionally limited system of government, assume powers not granted to the federal government by our Constitution, and he wishes to sink the hooks of socialism in every state in our Union in defiance of our Constitution and its Tenth amendment. In short, Obama is a domestic enemy of our Constitution and the intentions and beliefs under which it was adopted.
[1] NOTE: The 16th Amendment did not change the constitutional rule for a general tax among the states calculated from the value of people’s property, real or personal. See, for example, BROMLEY v. MCCAUGHN, 280 U.S. 124 (1929) the Court states, well after the adoption of the 16th Amendment, and in crystal clear language: “As the present tax is not apportioned, it is forbidden, if direct.”
Regards,
JWK
Black working people who support Obama are absolutely correct when they say, as a general statement, “its all about the Benjamins”. But they seem to be easily conned into surrendering the “Benjamins“ they earn to "agents of change" who merely seek to change the faces of those holding political plum jobs within the inner circle of the Washington Establishment. Do black voters not realize they will be betrayed by Obama's "agents of change and remain tax slaves ___ useful to work and pay taxes to feed political plum job holders on our federal plantation?