• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

GOP Congressman Mo Brooks -War on Whites

The clear language of the clause is vague and general.

There was discussion about making it more specific and it didn't happen. And clearly there were people arguing at the time of framing that the power should be widespread.

So I am sorry but you are just wrong.

The clear language is less ambiguous than say the 2nd amendment, which does say that the right to bear arms is so that militias could be formed.
 
Last edited:
If you think Jefferson et. al. left that clause vague in order to let future governments tax one person to pay another person's bills, then I am sorry but you are just wrong. We will have to disagree on this one.
 
The English had a system at the time of taking care of the poor with workhouses provided by local governments. I would think that colonists' familiarity with that system would make them even less likely to be able to imagine a federal tax to pay for each other's babies.
 
tjcmd said:
The English had a system at the time of taking care of the poor with workhouses provided by local governments. I would think that colonists' familiarity with that system would make them even less likely to be able to imagine a federal tax to pay for each other's babies.
Click to expand...

If they were able-bodied. If not they provided basic sustenance.

But the broader point was that there were public funds being used for general sustenance programs at the time.
 
Local, as all welfare should be. Not federal running up multi-trillion dollar debts. No framer of the Constitution would ever imagine such a misuse of federal taxing authority.
 
tjcmd said:
If you think Jefferson et. al. left that clause vague in order to let future governments tax one person to pay another person's bills, then I am sorry but you are just wrong. We will have to disagree on this one.
Click to expand...

1 Jefferson wasn't there

2. Jefferson taxed other people to pay his own bills
 
tjcmd said:
Local, as all welfare should be. Not federal running up multi-trillion dollar debts. No framer of the Constitution would ever imagine such a misuse of federal taxing authority.
Click to expand...

Debt as a percentage of GDP held by the public in 1790 was 40%. The use of trillions is irrelevant.
 
TuffaloDeac10 said:
1 Jefferson wasn't there

2. Jefferson taxed other people to pay his own bills
Click to expand...

1. Correct. I had forgotten that TJ was Minister to France at that time. If he had been there, maybe he would have had enough foresight to leave that clause out. My previous comments refer to the people who were there.

2. I hope TJ did not use federal taxes for his own welfare (salary as President excepted).
 
It must be such a burden for tjcmd to interpret the constitution for the entire country. I wish that we had a branch of government in charge of interpreting the constititution. Maybe the constitution says something about that.
 
tjcmd said:
1. Correct. I had forgotten that TJ was Minister to France at that time. If he had been there, maybe he would have had enough foresight to leave that clause out. My previous comments refer to the people who were there.

2. I hope TJ did not use federal taxes for his own welfare (salary as President excepted).
Click to expand...

Well he did. Taxes supported a system by which he wrung his bread from the sweat of other men's faces
 
I will bite hook line and sinker because I don't immediately know. How did federal taxes in Jefferson's time cause or induce slavery?
 
TAXATION IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL THEFT!!!!!!!!!111111111!!!!!!!!!!!!!

SLAVERY ON THE OTHER HAND...........................................
 
Last edited:
ChrisL68 said:
TAXATION IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL THEFT!!!!!!!!!111111111!!!!!!!!!!!!!

SLAVERY ON THE OTHER HAND...........................................
Click to expand...

I see that it takes you somewhat longer to get frustrated and resort to ad hominem attacks.
 
tjcmd said:
I see that it takes you somewhat longer to get frustrated and resort to ad hominem attacks.
Click to expand...

mocking someone's position as being dumb or inconsistent isn't an ad hominem.
 
tjcmd said:
UNCONSTITUTIONAL TAXATION IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL THEFT!!!!!!!!!111111111!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Click to expand...

mocking someone's position as being dumb or inconsistent isn't an ad hominem.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top