Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Didn't the polls indicate that Al Gore would win and stuff like that... it did not actually happen and he lost... Polls is one thing, real life is another...
Polls also showed that Kerry and Clinton wouldn't get the primary nod... they were in low single digits too..
Can Paul win the GOP nomination? No. But can he force the frontrunners to adjust their strategies to deal with him and his unique appeal? Yes. In fact, that's already happening.
I don't see how Paul cannot win the GOP nomination unless that blogger was psychic. I think Paul has a very REAL chance to win the GOP nomination... Keep the Dream Alive!
The IRS is an agency of the Department of the Treasury which is a department of the Cabinet consisting of senior appointees of the Executive branch of the Federal government. The Secretary of the Treasury is answerable to the President and the President could order the Secretary to eliminate the agency of the IRS.
Uh, yes-- he COULD void the XVIth Amendment to the Constitution. But he would be impeached and removed immediately,
Location: Midessa, Texas Home Yangzhou, Jiangsu temporarily
1,506 posts, read 4,280,051 times
Reputation: 992
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yeledaf
Uh, yes-- he COULD void the XVIth Amendment to the Constitution. But he would be impeached and removed immediately,
Maybe I am making a mistake here, but one thing you can count on for sure is that Ron Paul will never do anything unconstitutional. He has a 30 year voting record to back that up.
Maybe I am making a mistake here, but one thing you can count on for sure is that Ron Paul will never do anything unconstitutional. He has a 30 year voting record to back that up.
Please review the XVIth amendment and tell me how unilaterally rescinding it is not unconstitutional.
Polls are written, manipulated and ginned up by the elite..from both parties. They are purely designed to passively convince the general public that so 'n so and so 'n so (or in this case Clinton and Goul-liani) are the front runners and therefore will get the nomination and that we're stuck with them come election day because it satisfies their ultimate aims. Polls are just propaganda tools.
Location: Midessa, Texas Home Yangzhou, Jiangsu temporarily
1,506 posts, read 4,280,051 times
Reputation: 992
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yeledaf
Please review the XVIth amendment and tell me how unilaterally rescinding it is not unconstitutional.
I can tell you no such thing, because unilaterally rescinding the 16th amendment would clearly be unconstitutional. But rescinding the 16th amendment is not required to eliminate the IRS. Here is the text of the amendment:
Quote:
The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.
The purpose of this amendment was to allow congress to create an income tax without apportionment and not have it be ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court. Notice that the 16th amendment does not mandate or create the agency of the IRS or even an income tax for that matter. All it does is remove the requirement of apportionment from income taxes.
According the IRS's own homepage it was created by President Lincoln and Congress created the office of Commissioner of Internal Revenue. So the IRS then must be referring the Revenue Act of 1862 as the act in which it was created. The tax created by this act was repealed ten years later and the Supreme Court ruled that such taxes were unconstitutional.
So basically at the time that the IRS was founded, it was unconstitutional.
I can tell you no such thing, because unilaterally rescinding the 16th amendment would clearly be unconstitutional. But rescinding the 16th amendment is not required to eliminate the IRS. Here is the text of the amendment:
The purpose of this amendment was to allow congress to create an income tax without apportionment and not have it be ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court. Notice that the 16th amendment does not mandate or create the agency of the IRS or even an income tax for that matter. All it does is remove the requirement of apportionment from income taxes.
According the IRS's own homepage it was created by President Lincoln and Congress created the office of Commissioner of Internal Revenue. So the IRS then must be referring the Revenue Act of 1862 as the act in which it was created. The tax created by this act was repealed ten years later and the Supreme Court ruled that such taxes were unconstitutional.
So basically at the time that the IRS was founded, it was unconstitutional.
What section do you think Paul needs to circumvent?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
