Fair Tax Rally To Be On Hannity And Colmes>

[Man50D]

FairTax Rally and a special invitation to you

You are invited as special guests and participants to the Neal Boortz FairTax Rally to be held May 24th at the Gwinnett Convention Center outside Atlanta. Not only will this rally feature Congressman John Linder, WSB talk show host Neal Boortz, and FOX News star and conservative commentator Sean Hannity, but also FairTax.org leaders will be on hand, as well as FairTax activist and leader Herman Cain.

The goal of this rally, which will be broadcast nationally on Sean Hannity's FOX program, “Hannity & Colmes,” is to "kick up" the heat on national leaders to get the FairTax legislation moving. Join us for the this free rally and enjoy history in the making with fellow FairTaxers.

Date: Wednesday, May 24, 2006
Start time: 7:30 p.m.

Who: Neal Boortz
What: Free FairTax Rally
Where: Gwinnett Convention Center 6400 Sugarloaf Parkway Duluth, Georgia 30097

(800) 224-6422

Directions to Gwinnett Center: http://www.gwinnettcenter.com/pages/header/h_maps.html

Why: Neal Boortz is sick and tired of the IRS! He wants the IRS abolished and replaced with the FairTax!
Joining Neal Boortz at the rally:

Sean Hannity
Georgia Congressman John Linder
Herman Cain
FairTax.org leaders Consumer advocate Clark Howard Special musical guests Banks & Shane


There is no charge for this event and tickets are not required.
Please R.S.V.P. for your chance at front row seats to http://bigwinner.cxri.net/Contest.asp?r=10004&s=10732.
Visit Americans For Fair Taxation, www.FairTax.org, to find out more about the FairTax.

[Man50D]

This is update to recent threads regarding the Fair Tax Rally. Past threads did not include information of the rally being boradcast on Hannity And Colmes.

[Man50D]

Fair Tax Ping!

[ancient_geezer]

A Taxreform bump for you all.

If anyone would like to be added to this ping list let me know.

John Linder in the House(HR25) & Saxby Chambliss Senate(S25) offer a comprehensive bill to kill all income and SS/Medicare payroll taxes outright and replace them with with a national retail sales tax administered by the states.

H.R.25,S.25
A bill to promote freedom, fairness, and economic opportunity by repealing the income tax and other taxes, abolishing the Internal Revenue Service, and enacting a national retail sales tax to be administered primarily by the States.

Refer for additional information:

• search: "national sales tax" OR "national retail sales tax" OR "fairtax"

[rodguy911]

This is a great thing but with the congress we have now they would take a fair tax bill like boortz and linder have designed and rip it to shreds if they ever did take a serious look at it. Which I seriously doubt will ever happen. Too many entrenched a-holes feeding at the trough of a huge bureaucracy.

[xcamel]

TANSTAAFT!

(There aint no such thing as a FairTax)

Double digit taxation for single digit IQ's

*pinglist*

If H.R. 25 was enacted into law tomorrow, and a future Congress followed its language to the letter, would that future Congress have authority to calculate a tax from corporate income as upheld in FLINT v. STONE TRACY CO., 220 U.S. 107 (1911)? The answer is, YES! Our socialists in Congress would still be able to lay and collect a tax calculated from income just as is now calculated under the Income Tax! This is what the FairTax Con Artists don`t tell you.

Freepmail me to get on or off.

[concerned about politics]

FairTax Rally and a special invitation to you

The politicians would lose all their power with a fair tax. They wouldn't have control over us any more.

Right now, they can fiscally reward and punish the American citizen any time they want in order to control them.
They can make you buy through a tax break, and get you to stop by raising taxes.
They can get you to buy houses by lowering the interest rates, and get you to stop by raising them.
They can raise gas tax to get you to stop buying bigger cars, and lower it to get you to buy bigger cars.
They can buy votes with your money if they need to, and they'll leave you alone if you voluntarily hand over the cash.
The list of government opression goes on and on.

All your a$$es belong to them.

[maine-iac7]

This is a great thing but with the congress we have now they would take a fair tax bill like boortz and linder have designed and rip it to shreds if they ever did take a serious look at it. Which I seriously doubt will ever happen. Too many entrenched a-holes feeding at the trough of a huge bureaucracy.

Yeah - so we'll all just not let our voices be heard in DC or letters to the editor to get people educated on the Fair Tax, or email people in our email addresses to alert them, Or hound our friendly media to keep them on it because they know we're for it - etc ec.

Let's just sit back and twiddle or thumbs and then when it doesn't go thru ' blast everyone else.

Yep, that'll work...

[EternalVigilance]

Tax freedom BUMP!

[Prime Choice]

This is what the FairTax Con Artists don`t tell you.

That and their fraudulent claims that "fair tax" is 23% when it actually starts at 30%...and it'll only go up from there.

[xcamel]

FairTax would put the government in the business of market manipulation. Artificially causing prices to rise by legislative fiat to fill their coffers. Tell me what is "fair" about that.

Get your duct tape out, because when you pose this question to a fairtaxer, their heads usually explode in a fit of pure rage.

[ancient_geezer]

It is interesting to note what you have failed to state:

The only thing that has ever prevented Congress from levying both income and retail taxes at the same is the same thing preventing them under the current income/payroll taxes system and would be preventing them from doing so under a retail sales tax only system.

The American electorate would politically hang any politician so foolish as to try such a dumb move.

 

The portions of the income tax that was upheld as valid by Flint vs Tracy was held to be constitutional by Pollock v. Farmers as well and would continue to be Constitutional even if the 16th amendment were repealed tomorrow.

 

POLLOCK v. FARMERS' LOAN & TRUST CO., 158 U.S. 601 (1895):

• "We have considered the act only in respect of the tax on income derived from real estate, and from invested personal property, and have not commented on so much of it as bears on gains or profits from business, privileges, or employments, in view of the instances in which taxation on business, privileges, or employments has assumed the guise of an excise tax and been sustained as such."

• "If that[rents from land] be stricken out, and also the income from all invested personal property, bonds, stocks, investments of all kinds, it is obvious that by a r the largest part of the anticipated revenue would be eliminated, and this would leave the burden of the tax to be borne by professions, trades, employments, or vocations; and in that way what was intended as a tax on capital would remain, in substance, a tax on occupations and labor. We cannot believe that such was the intention of congress."

• "We do not mean to say that an act laying by apportionment a direct tax on all real estate and personal property, or the income thereof, might not also lay excise taxes on business, privileges, employments, and vocations. "

• Our conclusions may therefore be summed up as follows:

  First. We adhere to the opinion already announced,-that, taxes on real estate being indisputably direct taxes, taxes on the rents or income of real estate are equally direct taxes.

  Second. We are of opinion that taxes on personal property, or on the income of personal property, are likewise direct taxes.

  Third. The tax imposed by sections 27 to 37, inclusive, of the act of 1894, so far as it falls on the income of real estate, and of personal property, being a direct tax, within the meaning of the constitution, and therefore unconstitutional and void, because not apportioned according to representation, all those sections, constituting one entire scheme of taxation, are necessarily invalid.

• Mr. Justice WHITE, dissenting.

  16. The injustice of the conclusion points to the error of adopting it. It takes invested wealth, and reads it into the constitution as a favored and protected class of property, which cannot be taxed without apportionment, while it leaves the occupation of the minister, the doctor, the professor, the lawyer, the inventor, the author, the merchant, the mechanic, and all other forms of industry upon which the prosperity of a people must depend, subject to taxation without that condition.

[hole_n_one]

Only Sean (look at me) Hannity would start his radio program everyday with an announcement that today's show is a "Special Edition" of the Sean Hannity show.

[xcamel]

So the 1895 decision directly superceeded the 1911 decision. I don't think so.

[ancient_geezer]

FairTax would put the government in the business of market manipulation. Artificially causing prices to rise by legislative fiat to fill their coffers. Tell me what is "fair" about that.

What do you think deficit spending under the current tax system is? Debt that is directly pumping new fiat dollars into the economy creating inflation that results in increased taxes as all nominal wage and income rise in response to that inflation.

Not only does the AMT trap an evergrowing number of tax payers into ever increasing taxation, the basic rates at which income and wages are taxed assures ever growing dollars revenue into government coffers.

Defitcit spending is one of the more certain ways to assure montary inflation to keep the spigots open.

But that that is the purpose of the income tax as laid out by the Chairman of the Federal Reserve bank during FDR's administration. For the Intent of the individual income tax is for political and social control not revenue collection. As well as the fact the Individual Income tax is maintained to establish and hold every person in the country perpetual legal jeopardy. That is a situation that must end with the repeal of the income tax from the statutes, and the prohibition of its use by Constitutional amendment that future generations will not face the same manner of manipulation and interference in their lives.

 

"As a matter of fact, what the income tax does — and this is the debate that I think we always try to get into in order to let you and him fight, see — and the people of this country are led down a path where the actual control of their resources, which in the end is the control over their will, is handed off to the government."

. . .

"The government then manipulates that will in order to destroy the freedom of our electoral system through the income tax structure, and we call the resulting slavery a free system."

"In point of fact, it is not as the founders understood, and the only way to restore real freedom is to give people back control over the income that they earn so that they won‘t, at the voting booth and in other phony issues, be subject to that manipulation."

- KEYES TRANSCRIPT (01/28/02)

[pigdog]

Judging from the attacks it generates, the FairTax must be catching on and the Squirrels are in panic mode.

You've managed to string together several erroneous statements in one big nonsensical blob.

There are no "con artists" in the FairTax.

There is no "fraudulent claim" about 23% - the bill right now actually specifies that as tax inclusive to be compared to income tax which is also tax inclusive.

The FairTax won't start at anything like 30% (tax exclusive) or 23% (tax inclusive) but rather would if enacted now be about 19% tax inclusive.

Your "big blast" just plopped on its face.

[gpapa]

Questions.

Will the 23% national tax apply to the purchase of gasoline?

[pigdog]

The posteer xcamel is merely one of the hit and run artists the Status Quo Lover movement seems to attract. Nothing much of substance there insofar as I can see.

[xcamel]

You are going to win an award someday for thread spamming.

[xcamel]

Sure it will... and at $7.50 an gallon, not $3.00

[RobFromGa]

EITHER BOORTZ IS STUPID, OR THINKS ALL HIS SUPPORTERS ARE

Today on his website Boortz posts the following about the Fair Tax Book 2nd edition paperback:

"Yesterday we got the first numbers for sales of the soft cover edition of The FairTax Book. We debuted as No. 3! Now ... a little historical perspective. In the 1950's Nobel Peace Prize winner Elie Weisel's book "Night" debuted as No 1. on the New York Times paperback list. Then in 1966 Truman Capote's "In Cold Blood" debuted as No. 2. Now, in 2006, The FairTax Book debuts as No. 3! This is the highest first week for a paperback in 40 years!"

First of all, I am NOT disputing that FairTax Book will be at #3 on the NYT NONFICTION PAPERBACK book list when the list comes out next week. But the rest of Boortz's over-the-top comparisons are simply flat-out wrong.

First, "Night" by Weisel is #1 on the NYT Nonfiction Paperback book list right now, TODAY, and probably also next week as well. It is the OPRAH book of the moment.

Second, "In True Blood" by Capote is #2 on the NYT Nonfiction Paperback book list right now, TODAY, and probably also next week as well. It is tied in with the movie CAPOTE.

SOURCE: http://www.nytimes.com/pages/books/bestseller/index.html

PAPERBACK NONFICTION (as of May 11 on website)
Top 5 at a Glance
1. NIGHT, by Elie Wiesel
2. IN COLD BLOOD, by Truman Capote
3. THE COVENANT WITH BLACK AMERICA.
4. MY LIFE SO FAR, by Jane Fonda
5. THE TIPPING POINT, by Malcolm Gladwell

So, of course Boortz is confused about whatever the NYT sent him about his book and thinks that his book is #3 highest all-time debut instead of #3 for a single week, with two books over forty years old ahead of his beloved tome.

He is either stupid or can't read. I am not taking anything away from a #3 debut on any list, even if it is the Non-Fiction Paperback list. But he can't stop there, he needs to claim highest debut in over forty years for a paperback.

Does he even think? Isn't it likely that when the Clinton bios came out in paperback they debuted at #1 on the paperback lists?

There are probably many nonfiction paperback books that came out in the past 40 years that opened in the top 3 on the non-fiction paperback list, this is a relatively low-volume list to start with (compared with Fiction numbers).

Here's a few from the last year:

Million Little Pieces debuted at #1 on NYT Non-Fiction Paperback list on October 9, 2005.

Worth More Dead debuted at #3 (same as Boortz) on Dec 18, 2005.

NIGHT (reissue) debuted at #1 on Feb 5, 2006.

Best Paperback Debut in over 40 years-- GIVE ME A BREAK.

Why does Boortz have to misrepresent everything?