In getting to my teetering piles of unopened mail, on this day dedicated to Thanksgiving - and I do give thanks, especially for living in a free country. Or at least, a relatively free country - I have come across a mailing from an outfit called the Center for Freedom and Prosperity Foundation. Their letter and petition insert is all about Repealing the Death Tax. What is the Death Tax? As they tell it:
“Back in 2001, the Death Tax [a tax on citizens’ estates] was temporarily repealed. Because President Bush and Congress recognized the damage it was doing to families and to the economy…they voted to phase out this burdensome tax over 10 years - but due to budget reconciliation rules, the Death Tax was resurrected in 2011 by President Obama.
“THIS IS OUTRAGEOUS!
“The Death Tax does nothing more than discourage savings and investment in businesses - strangles job creation - causes wages and productivity to plummet - and crushes entrepreneurship, all of which are critical to economic growth!…”
Plus the ability, and right, to pass on to one’s children the fruit of one’s life’s labor. Of course, if one is of the Marxist mentality that ‘the children’ - everybody - belong to the state, are effectively wards of the state,1 it’s easy to think of stealing from the rich to give to the poor, of robbing the haves to give to the have-nots, of taking from Peter to pay Paul. Easy, especially when ‘Paul’ is voting for you to vote yourself money out of other people’s pockets. All, as I have said in these pages before, pitifully low-consciousness stuff.
And is shortsighted to boot. As the F&PF’s letter goes on to say, and point out:
“Liberals argue that eliminating the Death tax would add to the national debt, but they are wrong!
“In fact, former Treasury Department economist, Stephen Entin, reported recently that repealing the Death tax WOULD BOOST the economy by as much as $90 Billion!
“Why? Because businesses (especially family owned) would be able to save and invest in their companies. They would be able to purchase new equipment and hire more workers. Repealing the Death Tax actually HELPS the economy!”
The bottom line (as it were):
“The Death Tax is an attack on the American dream. Why do Liberals want to punish success when it is estimated that repealing it would create l39,000 jobs…and would spare over $1 Trillion in capital? THIS MAKES NO SENSE!!
“The Death Tax tells Americans: ‘You can’t take it with you, and you can’t leave it to your kids.’ So it discourages and punishes the traditional American virtues of hard work, thrift, savings, and investment.
“The U.S. has the fourth highest Death Tax rate (40%) in the world even though 13 developed countries have completely repealed their death taxes (many years ago) because they found that eliminating this tax boosted their country’s capital stock and resulted in an increase of government revenues, and greater prosperity!
“Americans fundamentally believe that death should not be a taxable event. The Founders of our country believed this so strongly that they included a clause in the U.S. Constitution that forbids seizing an estate at death as a punishment for treason.2
“Yet, we have the Death Tax on tho books which steals up to 40% of everything a person leaves to their kids, as a punishment for success… merely for achieving the American Dream!” (emphases in original)
Which, of course, except for the 1% on the top of the economic ladder, has largely disappeared; dating from when the Cabal, with their frontman, Bill ‘Slick Willie’ Clinton at the helm, gutted the country’s manufacturing base with the likes of NAFTA, causing U.S. manufacturers to up stakes and move to cheaper labor countries (and the U.S. getting comparatively little in return for the favor). The “giant sucking sound” that Ross Perot warned about, and which gave impetus to his Third Party challenge to the Big Two; both of them neatly in the pocket of the NWO capos.
Though actually, it’s a bit moot to point out the economic benefits of the repealing of the Death Tax. For, all the ‘economic’ factors in the world are going to change anyway. With the ‘hydrating’ of the world, via the beginnings of
the New Order of Things.
Just not the one that our erstwhile masters would have had us inhabit, as their subjects. To be culled at their whim and will. A Plan a long time in the works.
Of a larger scheme of things even than theirs.
—
footnotes:
1 And thus, why Marxists (and other collectivists) want to eliminate the family unit. And are doing a heckuva good job of it, with their various family-killing policies.
But to continue.
2 And speaking of the Constitution, the enacting of a Death Tax is constitutionally questionable anyway. As the F&PF’s letter begins:
“IN DIRECT VIOLATION of the CONSTITUTION, Barack Obama perverted Article 1 Section 8 to confiscate wealth from individuals by reinstating the DEATH TAX to steal personal property, harm businesses, destroy jobs, lower wages, and deny freedom and prosperity…”
All as part of the Cloward-Piven Strategy to bankrupt the country, in order to help it fall into the Marxists’ hands like a piece of overripe fruit; and as part of Obama’s declared “fundamentally transforming (of) the United States of America”.
As for Article l Section 8: that refers, yes, to financial exercises “to provide for the common Defense and general Welfare of the United States,” but in relation to the enumerated powers of the federal government, as granted to it by the Constitution. Else it would have made no sense for the Constitution to go on and list those enumerated powers. As such an eminent source in understanding the clear intent of the Constitution as ‘the Father of the Constitution,’ James Madison, pointed out in The Federalist Papers (and elsewhere), in clearly delineating the terms of the new contract for the fledgling new nation.
As I have indicated elsewhere, we are up against a battle between the Light and the Dark - between the ‘original intent’ of the Constitution (and as amendable legally) and those miscreants who have tried to make of it “just a damn piece of paper,” in coming up with the laughable case that it is but ‘a living document,’ subject to the interpretative whim of the courts (and ultimately, the SCOTUS) at any given time.
Those justices have a lot to answer for, in their execrable, extra-constitutional decisions over the years.
Those justices have a lot to answer for, in their execrable, extra-constitutional decisions over the years.
But to continue.
---
P.S. As for this business of shyster lawyers and similar judges having treated the Constitution like "just a damn piece of paper," or 'a living document': My pile of mail has also disclosed a letter from a member of the family of a judge in Oregon regarding - well, I'll let his son talk for himself:
"Today, my father was forced to give up the home our family grew up in because he is being persecuted for standing firm in his faith.
"My father, Judge Vance Day, is under attack by the Oregon Commission of Judicial Fitness because they claim he is biased and unfit to be a judge.
"They aren't attacking him for what he has done.
"They are attacking him for what he is.
"My father is a Christian..."
The situation: Judge Day recused himself from officiating at a same-sex marriage ceremony.
That's it.*
So, judges can't be Christians in this Brave New World a'borning???
What arrant nonsense.
Hey, Commissioners: That's the only kind of judges that this nation had for years. Well, there was the occasional Jew, or Deist. But I wouldn't think that there were many atheists in the bunch. Given that the nation was founded by believers. (Some of whom were the originators of this very day's celebrations.)
And given that the federal judge who declared that same-sex marriages were 'the law of the land' in the state of Oregon is going to have to eat his decree anyway, when things are set to rights in this country, and the judges that were appointed by Obama, and all of the decisions that they figured in crucially, will be going into the dust bin. Along with the Usurper himself. After his trial, in a reconstituted court of law, for our getting back to American Common Law, from the Maritime Law that it has been operating under unconstitutionally for years.
For the beginning of this nation getting back to its roots in the (proper) rule of law. Not the rule of men. Aka arbitrary law. Aka tyranny.
As for the judge's position on same-sex marriages: He was absolutely right to recuse himself from officiating at that ceremony; which has elements of religion in it, and its origins. But which situation, and attitude, does not bar the man from being a good judge. Judges recuse themselves all the time from trials that may offer a matter of conflict of interest about them. (As two of the U.S. Supreme Court justices in the Same-Sex Marriage decision had, and refused to acknowledge.) That doesn't bar them from their job in the society. It is a matter rather of appreciation when a judge would bar him- or herself from a particular trial, on that basis. Would that we had more of that sort of thing in this country. Not less. With all the corruption that is going on in the country. And in its courtrooms; reflecting the general disgusting tenor of the times.
But I depart from the situation at hand. I will just conclude my comment by saying, to the Oregon Commission of Judicial Fitness, regarding their stance in this matter:
Bollocks.
And maybe someone up there in Oregon should look at your fitness to judge. In this matter. And any other.
Sign me: a non-Christian. But someone with a decided sense of justice. Of fairness.
And that sense WILL rule in this country again. After its long venture into the darkness. The darkness
of injustice.
And unconstitutionality.
* Actually, he went even further than that, and decided, in order not to be seen as being selective, no longer to officiate at any weddings. Such is the man's attempts at fairness, in treating everyone as the same.
P.P.S. And as Larry P. Arnn, President of Hillsdale College, has said, on this day of thanksgiving;
"Constitutional government is a blessing."
And so say I.
And at least it got us here.
At
The End.
Of
The Exercise.
---
P.S. As for this business of shyster lawyers and similar judges having treated the Constitution like "just a damn piece of paper," or 'a living document': My pile of mail has also disclosed a letter from a member of the family of a judge in Oregon regarding - well, I'll let his son talk for himself:
"Today, my father was forced to give up the home our family grew up in because he is being persecuted for standing firm in his faith.
"My father, Judge Vance Day, is under attack by the Oregon Commission of Judicial Fitness because they claim he is biased and unfit to be a judge.
"They aren't attacking him for what he has done.
"They are attacking him for what he is.
"My father is a Christian..."
The situation: Judge Day recused himself from officiating at a same-sex marriage ceremony.
That's it.*
So, judges can't be Christians in this Brave New World a'borning???
What arrant nonsense.
Hey, Commissioners: That's the only kind of judges that this nation had for years. Well, there was the occasional Jew, or Deist. But I wouldn't think that there were many atheists in the bunch. Given that the nation was founded by believers. (Some of whom were the originators of this very day's celebrations.)
And given that the federal judge who declared that same-sex marriages were 'the law of the land' in the state of Oregon is going to have to eat his decree anyway, when things are set to rights in this country, and the judges that were appointed by Obama, and all of the decisions that they figured in crucially, will be going into the dust bin. Along with the Usurper himself. After his trial, in a reconstituted court of law, for our getting back to American Common Law, from the Maritime Law that it has been operating under unconstitutionally for years.
For the beginning of this nation getting back to its roots in the (proper) rule of law. Not the rule of men. Aka arbitrary law. Aka tyranny.
As for the judge's position on same-sex marriages: He was absolutely right to recuse himself from officiating at that ceremony; which has elements of religion in it, and its origins. But which situation, and attitude, does not bar the man from being a good judge. Judges recuse themselves all the time from trials that may offer a matter of conflict of interest about them. (As two of the U.S. Supreme Court justices in the Same-Sex Marriage decision had, and refused to acknowledge.) That doesn't bar them from their job in the society. It is a matter rather of appreciation when a judge would bar him- or herself from a particular trial, on that basis. Would that we had more of that sort of thing in this country. Not less. With all the corruption that is going on in the country. And in its courtrooms; reflecting the general disgusting tenor of the times.
But I depart from the situation at hand. I will just conclude my comment by saying, to the Oregon Commission of Judicial Fitness, regarding their stance in this matter:
Bollocks.
And maybe someone up there in Oregon should look at your fitness to judge. In this matter. And any other.
Sign me: a non-Christian. But someone with a decided sense of justice. Of fairness.
And that sense WILL rule in this country again. After its long venture into the darkness. The darkness
of injustice.
And unconstitutionality.
* Actually, he went even further than that, and decided, in order not to be seen as being selective, no longer to officiate at any weddings. Such is the man's attempts at fairness, in treating everyone as the same.
P.P.S. And as Larry P. Arnn, President of Hillsdale College, has said, on this day of thanksgiving;
"Constitutional government is a blessing."
And so say I.
And at least it got us here.
At
The End.
Of
The Exercise.
No comments:
Post a Comment