Tab Content
  • johnwk's Avatar
    07-20-2017, 07:31 PM
    I see you have not commented on the article you posted. Why post an article if you are unwilling to articulate why you posted the article, and what exactly is one to glean from the article in reference to the present discussion? JWK
    54 replies | 1307 view(s)
  • johnwk's Avatar
    07-20-2017, 05:42 PM
    The answer to your question is found in the most fundamental rule of constitutional construction which is stated as follows: ”The fundamental principle of constitutional construction is that effect must be given to the intent of the framers of the organic law and of the people adopting it. This is the polestar in the construction of constitutions, all other principles of construction are only rules or guides to aid in the determination of the intention of the constitution’s framers.”--- numerous citations omitted__ Vol.16 American Jurisprudence, 2d Constitutional law (1992 edition), pages 418-19 - - - Par. 92. Intent of framers and adopters as controlling. To determine what our Constitution means is to follow its text and then research its legislative intent, as expressed during its framing and ratification process, which gives context to its text. I have taken the time to document and provide this information with regard to Congress laying and collecting taxes to finance to promotion of art. Are you in agreement that Congress has usurped a power not granted by financing the promotion of art? JWK
    17 replies | 393 view(s)
  • johnwk's Avatar
    07-20-2017, 03:36 PM
    . In addition to the facts already presented as to why federal funding of the “arts” ought to be ended, let us recall what transpired during our Constitution’s framing as it applies to the subject under discussion. During the framing of our Constitution there were a number of powers proposed to be vested in Congress. But after our Founders examined and debated such powers, they were rejected and never made their way into our Constitution. Here are some of those proposals pertinent to our discussion which our Founders addressed and rejected. Confirmation can be verified by CLICKING HERE A power . . .
    17 replies | 393 view(s)
  • johnwk's Avatar
    07-20-2017, 03:35 PM
    Thank you for clearing that up! JWK
    17 replies | 393 view(s)
  • johnwk's Avatar
    07-20-2017, 01:28 PM
    . With regard to the constitutionality of our federal government financing the promotion of "art", take note that those members of Congress who supported taxing and spending as proposed in the Arts and Humanities Act refused to offer a constitutional amendment granting power to Congress to tax and spend for the promotion of art. Instead, they chose to ignore our written Constitution and its limited power to promote the “Progress of Science and useful Arts “. . . by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries.” And why did out Founders refuse to grant the power which Congress usurped when passing the A&H Act? One of our forefathers sums it up in the following eloquent words which have come to pass: "The framers of the Constitution guarded so much against a possibility of such partial preferences as might be given, if Congress had the right to grant them, that, even to encourage learning and useful arts, the granting of patents is the extent of their power. And surely nothing could be less dangerous to the sovereignty or interest of the individual States than the encouragement which might be given to ingenious inventors or promoters of valuable inventions in the arts and sciences. The encouragement which the General Government might give to the fine arts, to commerce, to manufactures, and agriculture, might, if judiciously applied, redound to the honor of Congress, and the splendor, magnificence, and real advantage of the United States; but the wise framers of our Constitution saw that, if Congress had the power of exerting what has been called a royal munificence for these purposes, Congress might, like many royal benefactors, misplace their munificence; might elevate sycophants, and be inattentive to men unfriendly to the views of Government; might reward the ingenuity of the citizens of one State, and neglect a much greater genius of another. A citizen of a powerful State it might be said, was attended to, whilst that of one of less weight in the Federal scale was totally neglected. It is not sufficient, to remove these objections, to say, as some gentlemen have said, that Congress in incapable of partiality or absurdities, and that they are as far from committing them as my colleagues or myself. I tell them the Constitution was formed on a supposition of human frailty, and to restrain abuses of mistaken powers.” See: Annals of Congress Feb 7th,1792 Representative Page And what has the passage of the Arts and Humanities Act given us? It has given us such things as Andres Serrano's anti-Christian bigotry called "P*** Christ"; Robert Mapplethorpe’s homosexual display called “The Perfect Moment”; Annie Sprinkle’s pornographic performances at a New York theater; Karen Finley, “the nude, chocolate smeared women”; Kyle Abraham’s “The Watershed and When the Wolves Came In” focusing on sexual identity; a 2016 festival for sexual deviant singing groups who appeared in a “flash mob” in Denver; taxpayer financing for a sexual deviant festival in San Francisco; funding for the Feminist Press at the City University of New York to digitize classic LGBT titles; an open mic group in D.C for story telling about “***** Culture in America"; and the latest venomous and hateful smut on display financed by tax revenue being Shakespeare In Central Park depicting the violent murder of President Trump ___ it is not time to admit our Founders were absolutely correct to limit Congress’ power to “… securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries”?
    17 replies | 393 view(s)
  • johnwk's Avatar
    07-18-2017, 10:20 PM
    How does that question relate to the subject of the thread which is, Repeal and Replace, the elephant in the room: our free cheese faction? JWK
    54 replies | 1307 view(s)
  • johnwk's Avatar
    07-18-2017, 10:08 PM
    You beat me to the punch! Good work! JWK
    54 replies | 1307 view(s)
  • johnwk's Avatar
    07-18-2017, 06:53 PM
    :rolleyes: There is no question our founders intended to authorize Congress with power to provide our country with a modern up-to-date military and equipment, which would include an air force. What you are missing is, not only is the text of our Constitution to be followed, but its documented "legislative intent" as expressed during our Constitution's framing and ratification debates which gives context to its text. To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years; To provide and maintain a Navy;
    54 replies | 1307 view(s)
  • johnwk's Avatar
    07-18-2017, 05:32 PM
    I would like to see a “poll” in which only those who pay federal income tax, i.e., a poll in which the tax payer and only the tax payer is represented. Would they prefer our federal government adhereing to our federal Constitution and limiting its taxing and spending to finance the list which appears beneath Article 1, Section 8, Clause 1? The defined and limited powers listed beneath Article 1, Section 8. Clause 1, for which Congress is authorized to lay and collect taxes, is as follows: To borrow Money on the credit of the United States; To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes; To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;
    54 replies | 1307 view(s)
  • johnwk's Avatar
    07-17-2017, 07:22 AM
    Aside from the apparent un-constitutionality of Congress financing the promotion of “art”, there are a number of unassailable reasons for our Republican Controlled Congress to grow a spine and propose a Bill to end our federal government taxing and spending to promote the production of “art”. See: Ten Good Reasons to Eliminate Funding for the National Endowment for the Arts Reason #1: The Arts Will Have More Than Enough Support without the NEA Reason #2: The NEA Is Welfare for Cultural Elitists Reason #3: The NEA Discourages Charitable Gifts to the Arts
    17 replies | 393 view(s)
  • johnwk's Avatar
    07-17-2017, 04:41 AM
    Huh? The Bill proposed to end our federal government funding the production of "art". JWK
    17 replies | 393 view(s)
  • johnwk's Avatar
    07-16-2017, 08:22 PM
    . Should the Freedom Caucus sponsor the following bill? A BILL
    17 replies | 393 view(s)
  • johnwk's Avatar
    07-14-2017, 03:36 PM
    I hope big brother didn't see my comments. JWK
    54 replies | 1307 view(s)
  • johnwk's Avatar
    07-14-2017, 03:01 PM
    Federal Employee jobs and salary See: A-Z Index of U.S. Government Departments and Agencies Also see: Federal Jobs Overview ”Federal government jobs are available in every state and large metropolitan area, including overseas jobs in 140 countries. The average annual federal workers compensation, including pay plus benefits, exceeds $124,000 compared to just $61,051 for the private sector according to the United States Bureau of Economic Analysis.” Now tell me, who is the tax slave and who is the master?
    54 replies | 1307 view(s)
  • johnwk's Avatar
    07-14-2017, 08:10 AM
    If we don’t reverse our federal government’s tax-payers vs tax-getters redistribution policies, we will surely suffer the same fate as Venezuela, Chile, the UK, and other socialist countries which, instead of protecting the people’s inalienable right to succeed or fail at their own hand, have decided to use government force to steal the product of one person’s labor which is then transferred to another group to be used for their personal economic needs, which is an immoral use of government force. JWK They are not “liberals” or “progressives”. They are conniving Marxist parasites who use government force to steal and then enjoy the property which labor, business and investors have worked to create.
    54 replies | 1307 view(s)
  • johnwk's Avatar
    07-14-2017, 06:58 AM
    I see our snowflake Republicans in the Senate cannot put their foot down and refuse to finance health-care for millions upon millions of able bodied individuals who won’t work enough hours to pay for their own health-care needs, and many more millions who are foreigners who likewise receive subsidized health-care which is paid for by hard working tax-paying American citizens. When will our Republicans in Congress start protecting the interests of hard working American citizens, and cut the free cheese given to able bodied blood suckers who are too lazy to work for their own economic needs? Have Republican members in Congress forgotten the United States government was created with a fundamental purpose which is eloquently stated as follows? "Under a just and equal Government, every individual is entitled to protection in the enjoyment of the whole product of his labor, except such portion of it as is necessary to enable Government to protect the rest; this is given only in consideration of the protection offered. In every bounty, exclusive right, or monopoly, Government violates the stipulation on her part; for, by such a regulation, the product of one man's labor is transferred to the use and enjoyment of another. The exercise of such a right on the part of Government can be justified on no other principle, than that the whole product of the labor or every individual is the real property of Government, and may be distributed among the several parts of the community by government discretion; such a supposition would directly involve the idea, that every individual in the community is merely a slave and bondsman to Government, who, although he may labor, is not to expect protection in the product of his labor. An authority given to any Government to exercise such a principle, would lead to a complete system of tyranny." ___ See Representative Giles, speaking before Congress February 3rd, 1792 Why are Republicans in the Senate determined to keep a system afloat based upon robbery, theft and tyranny!
    54 replies | 1307 view(s)
  • johnwk's Avatar
    07-13-2017, 08:08 PM
    Totally irrelevant to our free cheese faction. JWK There was a time not too long ago in New York when the able-bodied were ashamed to accept home relief, a program created by Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1931 when he was Governor. Now, New York City and many other major cities are infested with countless factions who not only demand welfare, but use it to buy beer, wine, drugs, sex, and Lotto tickets.
    54 replies | 1307 view(s)
  • johnwk's Avatar
    07-13-2017, 05:40 PM
    If one does a little research regarding repeal and replacement of Obamacare, they will find countless articles asserting most Americans prefer Obamacare, e.g., see: Americans Prefer Obamacare May 18th, 2017 ”Most Americans prefer the Democratic version of a health-care law to the Republican measure that's now under consideration in the Senate. Fifty-three percent of Americans say they favor the Affordable Care Act, passed by Democrats under President Barack Obama, to the GOP's American Health-Care Act, passed recently by the GOP-controlled House. Only 27 percent prefer the Republican bill over the Democratic system, according to the latest survey by Public Policy Polling, a Democrat-oriented firm. This is similar to the findings of other recent polls.” The big problem with these polls is, when these polls are taken, they include the opinions of lazy able bodied ticks and fleas who won’t work enough hours to pay for their own health-care needs who are receiving subsidized health-care under Obamacare, and also includes the opinions of foreigners who have invaded America’s borders and are likewise receiving subsidized health-care which is paid for by tax-paying American citizens in addition to receiving other tax-payer finance “benefits”.
    54 replies | 1307 view(s)
  • johnwk's Avatar
    07-06-2017, 06:49 AM
    Our forefathers never intended the force of federal taxation to be used to tax one individual to finance the promotion of ideas or opinions of another taxpayer, and particularly not when the tax payer finds the tax getter’s opinions to be abhorrent and sinful. But this is exactly what the National Endowment for the Arts has been doing for decades, and it is our socialist/progressive crowd’s propaganda which finds favor when the NEA hands out “free”government cheese. For example see: The National Endowment For The Arts Funds Political Propaganda ”Name a liberal political issue—gun control, climate change, open immigration, gender identity—and you can find a government-funded art project that promotes it. Last month the agency doled out thousands of dollars for a play about activist lesbians who “are staunchly opposed to gun ownership.” They paid $20,000 for a series of “climate change-themed public art installations” in Minneapolis. Checking the immigration reform box, it approved a theatrical interpretation of President Obama’s deferred action program for $40,000.” And with respect to our forefathers and Founders wisdom, which our socialist/progressive crowd enjoys disparaging, it has been vindicated countless times over the years. Have the following words not come to pass? ”The encouragement which the General Government might give to the fine arts, to commerce, to manufactures, and agriculture, might, if judiciously applied, redound to the honor of Congress, and the splendor, magnificence, and real advantage of the United States; but the wise framers of our Constitution saw that, if Congress had the power of exerting what has been called a royal munificence for these purposes, Congress might, like many royal benefactors, misplace their munificence; might elevate sycophants, and be inattentive to men unfriendly to the views of Government; might reward the ingenuity of the citizens of one State, and neglect a much greater genius of another. A citizen of a powerful State it might be said, was attended to, whilst that of one of less weight in the Federal scale was totally neglected. It is not sufficient, to remove these objections, to say, as some gentlemen have said, that Congress in incapable of partiality or absurdities, and that they are as far from committing them as my colleagues or myself. I tell them the Constitution was formed on a supposition of human frailty, and to restrain abuses of mistaken powers.”Annals of Congress Feb 7th,1792 Representative Page JWK
    20 replies | 532 view(s)
  • johnwk's Avatar
    07-05-2017, 11:43 AM
    . With regard to this subject it is very instructive to recall what one of our forefathers stated concerning the limited power granted to Congress relevant to encouraging “learning and useful arts”. "The framers of the Constitution guarded so much against a possibility of such partial preferences as might be given, if Congress had the right to grant them, that, even to encourage learning and useful arts, the granting of patents is the extent of their power.” Annals of Congress Feb 7th,1792 Representative Page Not only is federal funding of the “arts” not authorized by our federal Constitution, but taxing and spending for this purpose, has given us such things as Andres Serrano's anti-Christian bigotry called "P*** Christ"; Robert Mapplethorpe’s homosexual display called “The Perfect Moment”; Annie Sprinkle’s pornographic performances at a New York theater; Karen Finley, “the nude, chocolate smeared women”; Kyle Abraham’s “The Watershed and When the Wolves Came In” focusing on sexual identity; a 2016 festival for sexual deviant singing groups who appeared in a “flash mob” in Denver; taxpayer financing for a sexual deviant festival in San Francisco; funding for the Feminist Press at the City University of New York to digitize classic LGBT titles; an open mic group in D.C for story telling about “***** Culture in America"; and the latest venomous and hateful smut on display financed by tax revenue being Shakespeare In Central Park depicting the violent murder of President Trump ___ all of which is a plain violation of a working person's 1st Amendment protections who has their earned wages confiscated to finance such crap. Let me explain some history. In 1998, the U. S. Supreme Court ruled in the case National Endowment for the Arts v. Finley that NEA grants are constitutional if content does not offend "...general standards of decency..." But the Court not only ignored the absence of a power granted to Congress by our Constitution to fund the promotion of art, it likewise ignored the carefully limited wording in our Constitution granting power to Congress To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts and how may this be done? “. . . by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries.”
    20 replies | 532 view(s)
  • johnwk's Avatar
    07-02-2017, 05:39 PM
    :rolleyes: JWK American citizens are sick and tired of being made into tax-slaves to finance a maternity ward for the poverty stricken populations of other countries who invade America’s borders to give birth.
    22 replies | 413 view(s)
  • johnwk's Avatar
    07-01-2017, 03:59 PM
    Thank you for your post. To learn how much tax money is allocated to Planned Parenthood, see: How Much of Your Tax Money Does Planned Parenthood Get? A New Report Will Tell You ”The report found the Planned Parenthood abortion corporation and its affiliates received $344.5 million in federal funds and another $1.2 billion in funding from Medicaid (which includes a combination of federal and state funds) for a total of $1.5 billion over three years from federal programs. The abortion giant receives $1.2 billion from Medicaid, $201 million from the Title X family planning program $40.6 million from Title XX Social Services block grants and $25.9 million from the Title V Maternal and Child health Services block grant.” JWK
    22 replies | 413 view(s)
  • johnwk's Avatar
    07-01-2017, 03:43 PM
    You are the one who disagrees and gives the impression of being the fountain of all knowledge. JWK
    22 replies | 413 view(s)
  • johnwk's Avatar
    07-01-2017, 03:42 PM
    Wrong. The answer is yes. JWK
    22 replies | 413 view(s)
  • johnwk's Avatar
    07-01-2017, 08:37 AM
    It seems perfectly clear why the vast majority of those in Congress have no intention to end Planned Parenthood funding. The reason being, it is a cash cow, like other socialist spending, for our Congress critters which rakes in millions upon millions in campaign contributions from those opposed, and those in favor of such funding. Ending federal spending and borrowing for the social needs of the people within the various States would end countless factious and dangerous groups which plague the Halls of Capitol Hill for a chance to bribe members of Congress with political campaign donations. One group favoring federal spending for a specific social cause, while another donor group protests such federal expenditures, but in the end, it is a corrupted and evil majority in Congress which knowingly and willingly is benefiting from donors on both sides. Keep in mind, to avoid these kinds of political factions on a national scale ___ factions which may be identified as tax-payers vs tax-getters ___ our wise founders refused to delegate a power to Congress over those “… objects which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the State.” These "objects" were specifically and intentionally left to the discretion of the people within each State! See, Federalist No. 45. Unfortunately, with countless “entitlements” having been unconstitutionally created by Congress which now finance the personal economic needs of the people within the various state borders, our national unfunded debt liability has risen to an estimated $125 TRILLION. And who are some of the other identifiable factions who may be characterized as tax-getters? Federally subsidized health-care recipients; federally subsidized food stamp recipients; federally subsidized Section Eight Housing recipients; federally funded unemployment benefit recipients; federally funded student loans and grant recipients; and millions of foreigners who have invaded America's borders who are also the recipients of free government cheese.
    22 replies | 413 view(s)
  • johnwk's Avatar
    22 replies | 413 view(s)
  • johnwk's Avatar
    07-01-2017, 08:31 AM
    Wrong. A specific amount of money is allocated to Planned Parenthood. JWK
    22 replies | 413 view(s)
  • johnwk's Avatar
    06-30-2017, 03:52 PM
    Was it not singled out to get its specific federal funding? JWK
    22 replies | 413 view(s)
  • johnwk's Avatar
    06-30-2017, 10:04 AM
    . Why cant we get this type of bill introduced in Congress? A BILL
    22 replies | 413 view(s)
  • johnwk's Avatar
    06-27-2017, 07:14 PM
    A corruptible money system and factious groups are two entirely different problems, and each has their own effects within our system. JWK "Of all the contrivances for cheating the laboring class of mankind, none have been more effectual than that which deludes them with paper money. This is the most effectual of inventions to fertilize the rich man's field by the sweat of the poor man's brow."_____ Daniel Webster.
    8 replies | 278 view(s)
More Activity

1 Visitor Messages

  1. View Conversation
    Hi I'm Chowder

    I saw your debate with Wild English nut-job Rose with the Fair Tax. Man you tore him apart!

    Anyway I want to say thanks for the info you posted on the Hannity Forums. I used to be a neo-con but I saw the light around December of last year.

    I also used to support the fair tax and really thought for a while it seemed like a good idea. But your statements have changed my mind.

    Thanks man.

    -Chowder.

    P.S Where is your sources for the info, I would like to read them more closely or did you rely mostly on the Constitution: the one document our Politicians ignore except for Ron Paul.
Showing Visitor Messages 1 to 1 of 1
About johnwk

Basic Information

Statistics


Total Posts
Total Posts
1,454
Posts Per Day
0.44
Visitor Messages
Total Messages
1
Most Recent Message
05-18-2011 11:03 PM
General Information
Last Activity
Today 08:22 AM
Join Date
07-19-2008
Referrals
1

1 Friend

  1. Weston White Weston White is offline

    Member

    Weston White
Showing Friends 1 to 1 of 1

01-26-2017


No results to display...
Page 1 of 8 123 ... LastLast

07-21-2017


07-20-2017


07-19-2017


07-18-2017


07-15-2017


07-14-2017


07-13-2017


07-01-2017


06-30-2017


06-27-2017


06-26-2017



Page 1 of 8 123 ... LastLast