Welcome to the official Tunnel Talk of Colonel White High School :: Class of 1963
Click the Cougar on the left to RETURN to ColonelWhite63.net
|
Cougar Tunnel Talk
Welcome to the official Tunnel Talk of Colonel White High School :: Class of 1963 Click the Cougar on the left to RETURN to ColonelWhite63.net |
|
| Search For Similar Forums · Return to Website | ||
 First |
 Prev |
 Reply |
 Forum |
Next  |
Last  |
| Viewing Page 1 of 1 (Total Posts: 8) |
| Author | Comment |
Bruce Hulman
 IP: 67.38.3.189 Aug 7, 06 - 6:55 PM |
Out of respect for Don Thompson..I offer the following!
Isn't this amazing? TAXES Accounts Receivable Tax Building Permit Tax Capital Gains Tax CDL license Tax Cigarette Tax Corporate Income Tax Court Fines (indirect taxes) Dog License Tax Federal Income Tax Federal Unemployment Tax (FUTA) Fishing License Tax Food License Tax Fuel permit tax Gasoline Tax (42 cents per gallon) Hunting License Tax Inheritance Tax Interest expense (tax on the money) Inventory tax IRS Interest Charges (tax on top of tax) IRS Penalties (tax on top of tax) Liquor Tax Local Income Tax Luxury Taxes Marriage License Tax Medicare Tax Property Tax Real Estate Tax Septic Permit Tax Service Charge Taxes Social Security Tax Road Usage Taxes (Truckers) Sales Taxes Recreational Vehicle Tax Road Toll Tax School Tax State Income Tax State Unemployment Tax (SUTA) Telephone federal excise tax Telephone federal universal service fee tax Telephone federal, state and local surcharge taxes Telephone minimum usage surcharge tax Telephone recurring and non-recurring charges tax Telephone state and local tax Telephone usage charge tax Toll Bridge Taxes Toll Tunnel Taxes Traffic Fines (indirect taxation) Trailer Registration Tax Utility Taxes Vehicle License Registration Tax Vehicle Sales Tax Watercraft Registration Tax Well Permit Tax Workers Compensation Tax COMMENTS: Not one of these taxes existed 100 years ago and our nation was the most prosperous in the world, had absolutely no national debt, had the largest middle class in the world and only one parent had to work to support the family. What the hell happened? |
|
paul marokus
IP: 67.153.148.210 Aug 10th, 2006 - 9:19 AM |
Re: Out of respect for Don Thompson..I offer the following!
americans have enjoyed living on the bubble for so long that we have come to feel we are entitled to low fuel prices. military dominance, respect from central and south american countries, etal. we have had a free ride for a very long time. the world changes, alliances change. |
|
D.T.
IP: 69.223.78.11 Aug 30th, 2006 - 10:46 PM |
Re: Out of respect for Don Thompson..I offer the following!
You forgot the Concealed Carry License... another tax on what is already provided for in the constitution w/out cost. 
|
|
Bruce Hulman
IP: 68.21.47.119 Sep 3rd, 2006 - 7:09 AM |
Re: Out of respect for Don Thompson..I offer the following!
Don, I believe the CCW permit is for people who "need" to carry a firearm for protection as part to their job. The 2nd amendment to the Constitution was for national protection or some reasonable objective like that. Carrying a handgun is not for the national protection or I can't see how carrying a handgun will make us safer as a nation. I also believe the 2nd amendment was written at a time when forming a militia group was likely. That won't happen now, in my opinion. Your turn 
|
|
D.T.
IP: 69.223.37.84 Sep 14th, 2006 - 2:54 AM |
Re: Out of respect for Don Thompson..I offer the following!
I guess the home invaders and other assorted perps, thieves and rapists don't need a permit, and of course the 'people' of the 1st, 2nd, 4th, 9th, and 10th ammendments shouldn't have the right to defend ourselves should they!!-- As Dr. Phil (a true wuss by the way)would say 'what the hell were you thinking?' BTW, the Supreme Court of the U.S. does not agree w/your view and opinion that the 'right to bear arms' is a collective right... the 'people' of the 2nd are the same people referred to in the ammendments listed above!!--- and the Ohio constitution simply says..."the citizens shall have the right to bare arms". |
|
Bruce Hulman
IP: 67.38.10.172 Sep 15th, 2006 - 9:56 PM |
Re: Out of respect for Don Thompson..I offer the following!
Don, Just because it is the Supreme Court does not mean they are "Supreme." A few of the judges are political hacks and are not intellectuals. For example, Scalia is a strict contstitutionalist or he thinks the words of the constitution are just as they are written; no room for interpretation. I bet he's a lot of fun! Then there is Clarence Thomas.... Yes, there are liberals on the court as well. I bet you anything none of the judges would condone living next to a person who "strokes" his/her machine gun at night or in the daytime for that matter. |
|
D.T.
IP: 69.223.75.173 Sep 20th, 2006 - 5:20 PM |
Re: Out of respect for Don Thompson..I offer the following!
Bruce, JUSTICE Scalia is a “constructionist”. The “hacks” that you are referring to are of the ‘Liberal Religion’ … I use the word religion (not meaning to defile the others types by association) to describe those on the court who try as they may to legislate from the bench –i.e. ‘interpret’ (meaning make up whatever they want). BTW, since when do only ‘intellectuals’ read. The constitution does not specify lawyers or ‘intellectuals’ as qualifications to be on the SCOTUS. Now please pick one of the following definitions: su‧preme1 səˈprim, sʊ- - Show Spelled Pronunciation[suh-preem, soo-] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation –adjective 1. highest in rank or authority; paramount; sovereign; chief. 2. of the highest quality, degree, character, importance, etc.: supreme courage. 3. greatest, utmost, or extreme 4. last or final; ultimate. American Heritage Dictionary - Cite This Source su•preme (s -pr m ) Pronunciation Key adj. 1. Greatest in power, authority, or rank; paramount or dominant. 2. Greatest in importance, degree, significance, character, or achievement. 3. Ultimate; final Well, which did you decide was the ‘Supremest’? And BTW, what’s wrong with Justice Thomas? I don’t recall ever hearing any criticism of Justice Marshall? (’67-’91). (He was also black, in case your ‘Liberal Memory’ has kicked in again.) BTW, Thurgood was recorded in chambers * telling the other Justices that they “should watch the ‘stories’ (soap operas) in the afternoon… they could learn a lot”! I await your reply by explaining that one. *From Mark Levin’s book: “Men in Black”. The exact wording from the Ohio Constitution: "The people have the right to bear arms for their defense and security;”... Article 1, Section 4. |
|
Bruce Hulman
IP: 68.74.0.162 Sep 20th, 2006 - 6:39 PM |
Re: Out of respect for Don Thompson..I offer the following!
Hi Don, My mistake about Scalia. I meant constructionist instead of constitionalist. Now, back the issue at hand. The reason I question the court's supremacy is because they were picked by people who clearly are not supreme especially this President. Supreme is not a word that comes to mind when thinking about Bush But, I digress and I likely will always digress because I possess a high level of digressosity and can show, on occasion, a sharp and clear digressiveness. Now, back on track. Whether or not liberal thinking judges make their rulings from the bench or do study and then make their rulings from the bench is a moot point. The judges have to be at the bench when they meet. Now, it's true the judges have chambers in which they study and write. But, for the most part, the opinions from the supreme court do come about when they meet and discuss. OK. Go get a mini gun, Vulcan machine gun, recoiless rifle, 44 magnum Desert Eagle semi-auto handgun, 105 mm howitzer, 155 mm artillery piece and place the howitzer and artillery piece on your front lawn. Also, have a ROTC kid do guard duty in front of your new home to show the world you ain't takin' no **** from nobody. Also, I would suggest claymore mines in the front yard to keep the kids from playing touch football on private property. But, the good side is you'll be protected. Woooops! I digressed again. Now what were those good ole boys thinking when they wrote the constitution. Seems to me they were trying to get orgainized and create a guidance document that made sense based on the way our country came about. Of course, at the time of the founding of the United States the founding fathers did not have the kind of neighborhood crime we have today. But, that aside, I am just guessing that you have to read other information besides the constitution to get a sense of the climate in which the constitution was written. You simply can't read the constitution by itself and think that your interpretation is the last word. You have to look at the bigger picture...in my opinion. I am betting that the right to bear arms was an offshoot of the militias that were formed to make up the original fighting force that essentially helped create the United States. I don't think George Washington or Thomas Jefferson would have ever imagined "gun nuts" sitting home stoking their "pieces" which include weapons with humongous firepower. I think the founding fathers had a notion that they didn't want to be caught defenseless against a threat from the national perspective. Afer all, the constitution is an outgrowth of a nation creating military conflict and not some domestic gun fight in the streets. Your turn |
| First |
Prev |
Reply |
Forum |
Next |
Last |
bravenet.com