Paul's call: end the IRS (Mod sez: No taxes of any kind! No war! Whoopee!)

Union Leader ^ | 9/30/07 | Garry Rayno

[traviskicks]

Manchester – Calls to abolish the Internal Revenue Service and repeal the Constitutional amendment that established the federal income tax drew loud applause yesterday for Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul.

The Texas Congressman drew an eclectic mix of more than 500 supporters -- young and old, Libertarians and anti-war Democrats, independents and conservative Republicans -- who cheered his message of limited government, low taxes, free markets, bringing the troops home from Iraq, and returning to a monetary policy based on the gold standard.

Paul said the gathering at Veterans Park wasn't about him, but about his message -- which, he said, has been resonating with more and more people.

"Something very significant is happening in this country today. The paradigm is shifting away from government controlling our lives by force," he said. "People are sick and tired of what's happening and want to control (their) own lives."

He said people should be able to keep 100 percent of the fruits of their labor. Income tax is an example of the government controlling people, he said, as are the draft, prohibition on drugs, seat belt laws and other regulations.

Paul said current monetary policy amounts to a "secret sinister tax" that takes wealth from the middle class and poor, and redistributes money to Wall Street and the wealthy. The crowd broke into applause when he said the federal reserve system should be abolished.

Earlier in the day, Paul told three New Hampshire reporters he hoped to turn the enthusiasm his campaign has generated -- through the Internet, in "meet-ups" and through campaign donations -- into votes.

The physician-turned-politician said he expects to spend more and more time in New Hampshire. "The slogan on your license plate would indicate this should be fertile ground for us here," he said, alluding to the state's "Live Free or Die" motto.

Paul said he is running on the same policies President Bush advocated when he ran in 2000, which, he added, are the same ones Republicans have run on for years: a balanced budget, limited government, personal freedom and no nation building.

"Most Republicans -- the leadership in Washington -- don't believe in their own platform; that's why they are losing," Paul said.

Rather than try to spread democracy around the world, he said, politicians ought to focus on some of the shortcomings in this country.

"You don't get a fair shake unless you join the establishment," he said.

Paul, who ran for President in 1988 as the Libertarian Party's nominee, said it's more practical to run as a Republican, noting he spent half of his money in 1988 just trying to get on the ballot in all 50 states.

The door-to-door canvassing that followed the rally -- dubbed the Paul Family Walk -- included about 30 family members who led groups of campaigners in the Queen City, Concord and Nashua. Paul himself visited New England College, Dartmouth College and the Dartmouth Medical School after the rally.

Liz Viering and her husband Peter, from Stonington, Conn., said Paul's opposition to the war in Iraq is the major reason they are supporting him. "Money spent on wars of choice takes money away from other programs," she said.

Miles LaPlant, a 21-year old college student from Attleboro, Mass., said Paul is the first candidate who has captured his attention. LaPlant said he likes Paul's stances regarding the Constitution and the country's founding principles.

Jason Kantz, his wife, Angela, and their two children came up from Cambridge, Mass., for the rally. Kantz said Paul "is the only candidate that gives logical answers and means what he says."

He said Paul's stand on the war in Iraq is also an important issue for him. "We need to reduce our involvement around the world and the amount of money we are spending," Kantz said.

Long-time Libertarian Party member Dennis Corrigan of Boxford, Mass., said he supported Paul when the Congressman ran for President as the Libertarian nominee. He said he has been a Libertarian for 40 years and headed the party in Canada at one time.

Corrigan and a friend were soliticiting signatures for a Massachusetts ballot initiative outlawing the income tax. Corrigan said his friend moved to New Hampshire as part of the Free State Project, adding that he plans to move to the state, as well.

Thomas Clark, Minister of the Somersworth Tri-City Convenant Church, gave the invocation for the rally. Before the rally, he said he supports Paul because of his pro-life stance. "The pro-life issue is a major issue for me," Clark said.

Paul concluded the rally by encouraging his supporters to keep the faith, saying most mass movements have been driven by only 2 or 3 percent of the population.

"You are part of that 3 percent today," he said.

A word from Jim Robinson to the moonbats:

"It is funny and sad to see FR become “Defend Big Guv And Like It Republic.” Something is in the water along the lines of the following formula: “Big Gov execesses are necessary in times of war; we will always be at war with “terror”; ergo, Big Guv will always be necessary so hug it and put an “R” after it.”

To all antiwar moonbats, Paulistas included:

Hey, if you don't like FR and or our support the war policies leave. Go find a website that supports your unfortunate, short-sighted and misguided antiwar efforts. It's really that simple.

In case you antiwar Paulistas haven't noticed, Free Republic supports the war effort 100%. Many of our chapters protest against the antiwar moonbats either weekly, monthly or whenever the opportunity arises. The DC Chapter has been protesting against the antiwar moonbats EVERY Friday night at Walter Reed for three years.

Free Republic has co-sponsored several cross country caravans and hundreds of rallies in cities all across the country and in DC against the antiwar moonbats and in support of our Commander-in-chief, our troops, the war effort and our Gold Star and Blue Star families, many of whom are FReepers.

When you are supporting antiwar moonbats you are working against Free Republic's mission, hurting our efforts, hurting our families who have lost loved ones or have loved ones involved in the fighting, hurting our troops, damaging their morale, working against our efforts to defeat the enemy, and, in fact, giving aid and comfort to the enemy.

Antiwar moonbats are the domestic enemy. Antiwar moonbats willingly give aid and comfort to the enemy during wartime. In my book, that's tantamount to treason. Ron Paul is an antiwar moonbat. You figure it out. If antiwar moonbats are the enemy and Ron Paul is an aid and comfort supplying antiwar moonbat, then Ron Paul IS the enemy!

If you Paulistas are looking for support on FR for an antiwar moonbat who is giving aid and comfort to our enemies, you're nuts! Free Republic will NEVER support antiwar moonbats!

As far as our official policy on Ron Paul is concerned, it's the same policy we have for his antiwar moonbat allies the traitors Harry Reid, Chuckie Schumer, Nancy Pelosi, Jack Murtha, Cindy Sheehan, Barbara Streisand, Jane Fonda, CodePink, International Answer, et al and their flaming antiwar spam monkeys. Ron Paul and his flaming antiwar spam monkeys can Kiss my Ass!!

Where the hell did you guys ever get the idea that enemy supporting antiwar moonbats would be welcome on FR?

That plain enough for you or do I need to spell it out?

168 posted on 09/30/2007 6:22:47 PM EDT by Jim Robinson (Our God-given unalienable rights are not open to debate, negotiation or compromise!)

[Jim Robinson]

"It is funny and sad to see FR become “Defend Big Guv And Like It Republic.” Something is in the water along the lines of the following formula: “Big Gov execesses are necessary in times of war; we will always be at war with “terror”; ergo, Big Guv will always be necessary so hug it and put an “R” after it.”

[traviskicks]

I don’t have a problem with mods altering inaccurate or misleading headlines, or even messing around, poking fun, joining in the forum or whatever is all good by me, it’s just that there wasn’t the usual notice saying the headline was altered by the mod, so somebody just perusing around FR might have thought I wrote it.

[Calpernia]

I think if we went to flat tax, we could get rid of the IRS. Just saying that the idea of no IRS is workable.

[Captain Kirk]

We didn't have a flat tax or an income tax before 1913 and got along fine.

[EternalVigilance]

What you think is not important for the purposes of this discussion. It’s what the candidates for POTUS think that matters.

And I don’t see Ron Paul offering up any practical, workable, constitutional, replacement for the income tax.

Minus that, his rhetoric is nothing more than demagoguery.

[Eric Blair 2084]

Paul’s rhetoric and stand on principle scares most Conservatives.

Standing on principle and honesty is scarier than coming face to face with Freddy Krueger for both Big Tent parties:

Judo works really well againt aging liberal hippie douchebag pacifists and left wingers. Next time they claim that the Iraq War was based on false pretenses and WMDs just say...

"We took a page out of the social engineering left wing playbook...if the goals were important and critical it doesn't matter what crap you had to invent to justify it. For example, you tree hugging environmentalists were upset when others didn't care about the rain forest...so you concocted this global warming idea to make it a little bit more personal. "

I've done it with my friends. It's laugh out loud funny when they have no answer. Try it.

[KDD]

May 7, 2001

The Case Against the Income Tax

Could America exist without an income tax? The idea seems radical, yet in truth America did just fine without a federal income tax for the first 126 years of its history. Prior to 1913, the government operated with revenues raised through tariffs, excise taxes, and property taxes, without ever touching a worker’s paycheck. In the late 1800s, when Congress first attempted to impose an income tax, the notion of taxing a citizen’s hard work was considered radical! Public outcry ensued; more importantly, the Supreme Court ruled the income tax unconstitutional. Only with passage of the 16th Amendment did Congress gain the ability to tax the productive endeavors of its citizens.

Yet don’t we need an income tax to fund the important functions of the federal government? You may be surprised to know that the income tax accounts for only approximately one-third of federal revenue. Only 10 years ago, the federal budget was roughly one-third less than it is today. Surely we could find ways to cut spending back to 1990 levels, especially when the Treasury has single year tax surpluses for the past several years. So perhaps the idea of an America without an income tax is not so radical after all.

The harmful effects of the income tax are obvious. First and foremost, it has enabled government to expand far beyond its proper constitutional limits, regulating virtually every aspect of our lives. It has given government a claim on our lives and work, destroying our privacy in the process. It takes billions of dollars out of the legitimate private economy, with most Americans giving more than a third of everything they make to the federal government. This economic drain destroys jobs and penalizes productive behavior. The ridiculous complexity of the tax laws makes compliance a nightmare for both individuals and businesses. All things considered, our Founders would be dismayed by the income tax mess and the tragic loss of liberty which results.

America without an income tax would be far more prosperous and far more free, but we must be prepared to fight to regain the liberty we have lost incrementally over the past century. I recently introduced “The Liberty Amendment,” legislation which would repeal the 16th Amendment and effectively abolish the income tax. I truly believe that real tax reform, reform that so many frustrated Americans desperately want, requires bold legislation that challenges the Washington mind set. Congress talks about reform, but the current tax debate really involves nothing of substance. Both parties are content to continue tinkering with the edges of the tax code to please various special interests. The Liberty Amendment is an attempt to eliminate the system altogether, forcing Congress to find a simple and fair way to collect limited federal revenues. Most of all, the Liberty Amendment is an initiative aimed at reducing the size and scope of the federal government.

Is it impossible to end the income tax? I don’t believe so. In fact, I believe a serious groundswell movement of disaffected taxpayers is growing in this country. Millions of Americans are fed up with the current tax system, and they will bring pressure on Congress. Some sidestep Congress completely, bringing legal challenges questioning the validity of the tax code and the 16th Amendment itself. Ultimately, the Liberty Amendment could serve as a flashpoint for these millions of voices.

[traviskicks]

You’ve said something nice about his libertarian domestic policy, and you’re still here.

Well, I can't say I am a 100% believer in all parts of Ron Paul's foreign policy views, but I think the basic idea of nonintervention, nonnation building, so-called 'ferocious isolationism', is certainly a conservative viewpoint, espoused by many other prominent conservatives, and worthy of debate, no?

Paul has other foreign policy proposals that are conservative in nature such as, US out of the UN, 'letters of Marque', arguing against the NAU, LOST, and big government 'free trade' agreements etc.. IMO.

[Calpernia]

I will NEVER believe a thing you post since you tried to pawn off your straw poll at the Official NJ RNC straw poll. You are a liar.

[KDD]

HON. RON PAUL OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
January 30, 2003

End the Income Tax- Pass the Liberty Amendment

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to introduce the Liberty Amendment, which repeals the 16th Amendment, thus paving the way for real change in the way government collects and spends the people’s hard-earned money. The Liberty Amendment also explicitly forbids the federal government from performing any action not explicitly authorized by the United States Constitution.

The 16th Amendment gives the federal government a direct claim on the lives of American citizens by enabling Congress to levy a direct income tax on individuals. Until the passage of the 16th amendment, the Supreme Court had consistently held that Congress had no power to impose an income tax.

Income taxes are responsible for the transformation of the federal government from one of limited powers into a vast leviathan whose tentacles reach into almost every aspect of American life. Thanks to the income tax, today the federal government routinely invades our privacy, and penalizes our every endeavor.

The Founding Fathers realized that “the power to tax is the power to destroy,” which is why they did not give the federal government the power to impose an income tax. Needless to say, the Founders would be horrified to know that Americans today give more than a third of their income to the federal government.

Income taxes not only diminish liberty, they retard economic growth by discouraging work and production. Our current tax system also forces Americans to waste valuable time and money on complacence with an ever-more complex tax code. The increased interest in flat-tax and national sales tax proposals, as well as the increasing number of small businesses that questioning the Internal Revenue Service’s (IRS) “withholding” system provides further proof that America is tired of the labyrinthine tax code. Americans are also increasingly fed up with an IRS that continues to ride roughshod over their civil liberties, despite recent “pro-taxpayer” reforms.

Mr. Speaker, America survived and prospered for 140 years without an income tax, and with a federal government that generally adhered to strictly constitutional functions, operating with modest excise revenues. The income tax opened the door to the era (and errors) of Big Government. I hope my colleagues will help close that door by cosponsoring the Liberty Amendment.

[Calpernia]

I don’t think Ron Paul should be eligible to run for President after this stunt:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1901940/posts
Congress Denounces Iran’s Ahmadinejad

16 that voted against it.

http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2007/roll895.xml

—— NAYS 16 -—

Abercrombie
Baldwin
Bartlett (MD)
Blumenauer
Conyers
Ellison
Flake
Gilchrest
Hinchey
Lee
McDermott
Miller, George
Moore (WI)
Olver
Paul
Stark

And I nominate him for testing out this E.O.:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1868556/posts
Executive Order: Blocking Property of Certain Persons Who Threaten Stabilization Efforts in Iraq

But this isn't for this discussion. I still think we can get rid of the IRS ;)

[Lirona]

"Muslims would be banned from immigrating here. "

and did he say what he would do with the muslims already here? Is he going to kick them all out?

Where and when did Ron Paul promise a muslim free America? Link please.

[traviskicks]

heh heh... not at all, just trying to eck out some sort of middle ground baseline for these big government types... :)

[KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle]

You are a liar.

Two of 'em uncovered on this thread, thus far; evidently, a Paulestinian behavioral trait. ;)

[EternalVigilance]

I’ve supported and contended for ending the income tax for many years. But, I back a constitutional, practical, workable, politically and economically viable way of doing it: the FairTax.

How does Ron Paul propose that we fund the legitimate functions of government? What is his plan for getting from where we are to where we need to be? Or, is he just demagoguing the issue for personal political gain?

[traviskicks]

Another ‘constitutional, practical, workable, politically and economically viable way’ to do it is to abolish about half the agencies in the Federal budget, that should cut the fat quite nicely.... for starters.

[AuH2O-1980]

If your new to an area, just how would you get this information?

Well, these days we've got this new-fangled machine called the Internet, where fine, upstanding citizens in any municipality across our great nation can share information about virtually anything -- including which restaurants in their neighborhoods are clean and which aren't.

[Lirona]

The article you linked to does not support your claim that Ron Paul will ban muslims from immigrating to the United States.

[Eric Blair 2084]

Anybody who has ANYTHING to do with politics in the DPRNJ is by definition a liar.

If you are involved Captain Kirk, than you Spock, Bones and Sulu are ALL LIARS.

[Extremely Extreme Extremist]

The words "muslim" and "Islam" appear nowhere in the scanty and pathetically lacking document provided.

It doesn't have to be. Since immigration laws would be enforced under Paul, that means Muslims wouldn't be using visas and other ways to come here and cause trouble.

[EternalVigilance]

How you spend, and how you tax, are two different matters.

But, in either case, you have to have a practical way to get from here to there. I don’t see Ron Paul offering that.

“Modest excise taxes” are not going to get the job done, even if you’ve managed to slay the spending dragon.

His “vision” is an impractical one, with little connection to reality.

Which is one of the reasons his proposals in the Congress almost never go anywhere.