Re: Save America by kicking all political rituals in the ass!

You can spew all the fallacious matter you choose, but it remains that you are (hopelessly) confused.

Per AIS5C2:

Each House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings, punish its Members for disorderly Behaviour, and, with the Concurrence of two thirds, expel a Member.

Note that the CONSTITUTION provides the House the power to determine the Rules of its Proceedings. If that body deems Members with certain affiliations to have certain positions/duties, then such is within its purview.

The problem occurs when Rules are imposed OUTSIDE of the House itself. This does not make political parties unconstitutional, but instead the advantage providing laws unconstitutional.

Regard$,
--MJ

Several major turning points mark the reversal of this [Constitutional enumerated powers] ethic.  The first was the passage in 1913 of the Sixteenth Amendment, which permitted a federal income tax.  This was the first major tax that was not levied on a proportional or uniform basis.  Hence, it allowed Congress a political free ride:  It could provide government benefits to many by imposing a disproportionately heavy tax burden on the wealthy.  ...  -- Stephen Moore, _Between Power and Liberty_



At 11:19 AM 5/26/2011, you wrote:

Dear Pigeon-Dung-for-a-Brain, MJ:  The SPIRIT of the Constitution
champions FAIRNESS and equality of the power of INDIVIDUALS to control
government.  The (they were only human) Founding Fathers knew that
there were rules needing to be made and laws passed to make this
country function.  But those naive Founding Fathers had no idea that
by giving Congress the 'power' to make its own rules, without any
controls over what those rules can be, that Congress would so willing
depart from the sacred SPIRIT of the Constitution that is: "Fair play
and democracy shall have supremacy in the USA!"  Having... "rules"
that give the power to 'the winning party', and not allocating power
to individuals equally, is a SUBVERSION of our sacred Representative
(parity) Republic!  There is NO ASPECT OF THE MANDATED STRUCTURE OF
OUR GOVERNMENT MORE IMPORTANT THAN THE REQUIREMENT THAT THE PEOPLE
CONTROL GOVERNMENT RATHER THAN GOVERNMENT CONTROLLING THE PEOPLE!!!
Congress, nor the President have the power to vote to take power away
from the People.  And Congress, nor the President have the authority
to do a God-damned THING that is socialist-communist or unfair!!!  My
New Constitution stipulates that no "rule" of Congress can concentrate
power in the hands of any individual or group beyond one-person-one-
vote.  Political parties, because they are unfair and use leverage NOT
granted by the Constitution are, and always have been
UNCONSTITUTIONAL!  You would be well advised NOT to question anything
I have done on behalf of the American People, because there is not a
Patriot on Earth with my intellect and my devotion to SAVING this
country!!!  — John A. Armistead —  Patriot
>
On May 25, 9:49 am, MJ <micha...@america.net> wrote:
> Political parties are unconstitutional because they impose a power
> structure within Congress that gives the... "power" to the winning
> party, rather than having a parity of power on every single issue
> voted upon.

 You are (hopelessly) confused.
> Per AIS5C2:Each House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings, punish its Members for disorderly Behaviour, and, with the Concurrence of two thirds, expel a Member.Note that the CONSTITUTION provides the House the power to determine the Rules of its Proceedings. If that body deems Members with certain affiliations to have certain positions/duties, then such is within its purview.
> The problem occurs when Rules are imposed OUTSIDE of the House itself. This does not make political parties unconstitutional, but instead the advantage providing laws unconstitutional.
> Regard$,
> --MJ
> Several major turning points mark the reversal of this [Constitutional enumerated powers] ethic.  The first was the passage in 1913 of the Sixteenth Amendment, which permitted a federal income tax.  This was the first major tax that was not levied on a proportional or uniform basis.  Hence, it allowed Congress a political free ride:  It could provide government benefits to many by imposing a disproportionately heavy tax burden on the wealthy.  ...  -- Stephen Moore, _Between Power and Liberty_

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.