Replace All Federal Taxes on Income with the Fair Tax Act , HR 25
Constitutional Convention
Just wondering if anyone is contacting their state reps. about forcing a constitutional convention. As fast as the this administration is moving we need to put as much pressure on our state reps as possible and quickly.
On a side note. If you want to make a statement about government control on business. Use your money.
Stop buying GM/Chevrolet products (including their finance arm).
Put your investments in non-government owned brokerages.
Close government subsidized bank accounts and open accounts in smaller banks and credit unions.
What do y'all think?
On a side note. If you want to make a statement about government control on business. Use your money.
Stop buying GM/Chevrolet products (including their finance arm).
Put your investments in non-government owned brokerages.
Close government subsidized bank accounts and open accounts in smaller banks and credit unions.
What do y'all think?
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Joshua on
-
There is no need to build a co-alition to acheive this. There is already one working on it. I think we should all join in this effort, instead of being fractured. We will have more influence than working seperately. It's being organized by the nationwide teaparty co-alition. Their effort is called the Bill of Federalisim amendment. Plank #6 is to abolish the 16th amendment.
http://www.nationwidechicagoteaparty.com/
http://www.federalismamendment.com/
-
Permalink Reply by Frank Calabrese on
-
It is way to early to start pushing unified coalitions. There are a number of organizations out there all with many good ideas. Let these groups have time to cultivate their ideas. When the strong ideas float to the top then a strong coalition or two can be developed. I Competition between groups will be beneficial in forming solid platforms. Caution against zealots,. right or left. The nature of this activity is to restore liberty by restricting governments ability to interfere with our lives.
-
-
We do not need coalitions that can bend the arm of government because they to will become corrupt over time. We do not need a conservative "Move On.org". We need organizations that will motivate the people to express their demands to the government. I do not trust that anything coming out of the legislative branch would reflect strongly enough the Fair Tax position.
We do not need to defeat those in power now. We need to crush them on the way to the convention. Those that support the Fair Tax as apolitical ploy need to be replaced before a CC will work and there are plenty of "Spectors "still out there.
-
Permalink Reply by JD on
-
I too am of the opinion that a ConCon would be dangerous. Remember, you are dealing with the masters of pork, adding crap to legislation that has absolutely nothing to do with the legislation's original intent.
Essentially, one could end up throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
I also believe that the setting congress will do nothing that will erode their power base.
A single pronged full frontal attack, regardless of how well organized, against a well entrenched foe is rarely successful. If the Fed is not well entrenched, I don't know who is.
-
Permalink Reply by micheleking on
-
The discussion for a "limited" CC and "no precedent" makes me very curious. Several meetings were held prior to the signing of the Art. of Confed. and between Sept. 1787 and May 1788 when SC finally assented to this Constitution. Were there no notes taken of agenda items? How could they conduct the business w/out parameters?
Was reading the Dec 1860 SC Secession document. They sent 3 "commissioners" (here's where I noted the Art of Confeds had "deputies") to deal with the federalies. If we "have to ratify by 2/3 majority", that's over 100 guys in the room. Where are you going to find that many righteous men? Even 2 guys apiece....
There is a USA scorecard: http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com/tenth Click on "State Sov. Res." for updates.
This was my question to Mr.Boldin of 10th Amendment Ctr.: Could the states sign a pact to only change 4 items and then go home? Repeal 16th and 17th Amendments, Enact FairTax HR25, set term limits.
This was part of his reply: "The people, through their agents in the state governments, could decide to change the constitution however they like. This is a strong reason why we oppose calls for a Con con. First of all, the government doesn't follow much of the constitution in the first place, so giving them another amendment to ignore isn't going to help the cause of liberty much."
Mr.GeneLouis, thanks for the book. I know this is another topic, but mayhap you know. Why could not the 3 bogus stooges, Specter, Collins and Snowe, be "recalled" and tossed out by their constituents? Especially after voting "stim$"
States incentive: ? 1/4 of .01% of $1million=$2,500 ? Is this correct?
Libertarian? I just sent them a nag yesterday to grab their fav-o-rite adult beverage and continue to watch the train wreck.
Frank Calabrese: The voice of reason. Thank you. Many of these sites are too wacky. Could we get a board that we all can use to (color code or something) to help keep track of to whom we speak? Grade it from far out lefty to far out righty. Like right now I'm on ConsPA but I don't know enuff about Ning to get a lot done. Could use some help.
p.s. Mr. Calabrese, yes to Credit Unions, Local folks,etc. Haven't bought new car in 25yrs. Can't work on 'em.
- ‹ Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
© 2024 Created by Marilyn Rickert.
Powered by
