So you think that our "republic" which is built upon a Constituion inclusive of a re-address of grievances by the people is sustainable while ignoring methods of petitioning grievances? Man, you have a lot to learn. Our nation is built upon bloodshed based upon the same deaf ear we are seeing today by contemporary government stealth.
What do you think America is about? A cattle yard with self-voted cattle prods striking us by our elected representatives?
So you think that our "republic" which is built upon a Constituion inclusive of a re-address of grievances by the people is sustainable while ignoring methods of petitioning grievances?
Redress of grievances is through the Courts, and through Congress when the Court does not suffice.
The Courts and Congress have addressed your grievances with current law and enforcement of that law. Whether you like their answers or the result in that context is irrelevant.
If you do not like their answers or the result, it is up to you to enlist me the individual voter of the validity of your grievence and to offer up an plan for resolving them with an acceptable alternative to the current source of your grievance. To qualify for my aid in changing the law or changing Congress to make sure the law is ultimately changed, you must validate your position with reasoned and authoritative debate.
So far none of you have done the first thing towards validating your position but offer your personal desires through hyperbole and emotional outbursts, out of context and mis-quotation of historical records totally lack in objective scholarship.
In my observation Tax Resistance movement's plea amounts to Taxation without Representation.
On the basis of my research and understanding of the Constitution that plea does not meet my concept of a valid grievance.
Lay out your case, and demonstrate its value in the face of vigourously opposed debate based on reason. I'm not interested in your emotional diatribes of not wanting to pay taxes that are clearly authorised under the Constitution of the United States in accord with my understanding of the Constitution and intent of the authors of that Constitution.
I have clearly and repeatedly laid out my position and in part the research basis from I draw my conclusion.
To enlist my aid in your cause, it is up to you to provide the authorative and reasoned rebuttal to the product of my research.
What do you think America is about?
A Constitutional Republic, which operates under the rule of law, not the the majority views of a plebicite.
You however have expressed what you are not about America:
I don't believe in government, any government;
That sir is anarchy, and not the government described by the Constitution for the United States. We live withing the framework of a representative form of government called a Republic which operates in the national mode upon the individual citizen.
This is not an anarachy of every man for himself with the rule of the warlord with the biggest guns takes the prize.
Your Hyperbole and wrapping yourself in pseudo-patriotism is denied by your expression of anarchy.