Tab Content
  • Root's Avatar
    5 replies | 60 view(s)
  • Root's Avatar
    01-14-2017, 09:58 PM
    ^saved
    9 replies | 542 view(s)
  • Root's Avatar
    01-13-2017, 09:57 AM
    What's next? A federal license for rolling papers?
    12 replies | 380 view(s)
  • Weston White's Avatar
    01-12-2017, 12:24 AM
    Great now we need another Maryl Streep meme, the only thespian to be nominated for an Emmy for having given a speech at the Golden Globes. The problem with her speech, aside from giving it at the wrong forum, obviously, is that she only means for it to apply to those that sit across from her aisle. Also I care not of the opinion of a witch that supports a child rapist. A true hypocrite in all respects, she is.
    64 replies | 2063 view(s)
  • Weston White's Avatar
    01-11-2017, 11:50 PM
    I don't know have to call BS on this. It doesn't make sense for him to do this, claiming duress and then go on to post the entire conspiracy in detail. It negates the intended purpose. If multiple death threats were actually made, I would be calling the police, regardless. Anybody know of another copy of this Pegasus video? I want to see what the hubbub is really all about.
    1362 replies | 51983 view(s)
  • Root's Avatar
    01-06-2017, 08:21 AM
    Root replied to a thread Cheap Headphones in Open Discussion
    The struggle is real. I need a set of earbuds that are low-profile enough to fit under a helmet, have a volume/pause button and can withstand the demands of the average skiing environment. Flat cord is a bonus
    14 replies | 289 view(s)
  • Weston White's Avatar
    84 replies | 1772 view(s)
  • Weston White's Avatar
    84 replies | 1772 view(s)
  • Weston White's Avatar
    01-05-2017, 07:45 AM
    All I know is that I would be chanting for pizza, hot dogs, and "waitresses" to be flown in, and would not stop until Obama flies away.
    4 replies | 293 view(s)
  • Weston White's Avatar
    01-05-2017, 07:11 AM
    Completely lacking in self-awareness. Entirely. Your firebrand no longer controls the narrative; your anti-audience is overtaking your target audience; and as it just so happens that your targeted audience easily gets confused, they are starting to ask you questions, tough questions that you cannot satisfactorily answer, because your “truth” is steeped in utter bollocks, misdirection and deception. You are losing your audience to new alternatives that you now, in utter desperation, decree as “fake-news.” (As if this is some new revolution. And I am the fricking idiot here? Right.)
    84 replies | 1772 view(s)
  • Weston White's Avatar
    01-05-2017, 02:37 AM
    Well, the other article states she demanded $25-million, Fox countered with $20-million, so she left for NBC for $15-million on the BS excuse that she will now have more time with her family--as she will be now be working there wearing three hats and under a contrasting demographic.
    28 replies | 693 view(s)
  • Weston White's Avatar
    01-04-2017, 10:18 AM
    And other pontificating hypocrite-elitists: http://heatst.com/politics/the-place-for-tax-woes-nine-msnbc-personalities-had-tax-liens-filed-against-them/
    0 replies | 122 view(s)
  • Weston White's Avatar
    01-04-2017, 01:12 AM
    So using public offices to counter the agenda of those that preceded them in those public offices becomes anti-government?
    127 replies | 2322 view(s)
  • Weston White's Avatar
    01-04-2017, 12:38 AM
    Oh I don't have a clue, I only ever see small clips from these shows. I namely watch Infowars content and keep eyes on Drudge.
    28 replies | 693 view(s)
  • Weston White's Avatar
    01-04-2017, 12:33 AM
    Alex Jones has stated his interview with Johnson was totally strange and he would never have him back on as a guest again. So things have to be pretty screwy about Johnson for AJ to publicly state his refusal to interview such a public figure.
    21 replies | 613 view(s)
  • Weston White's Avatar
    01-04-2017, 12:22 AM
    20-million a year and we are to believe these are objective, impartial journalists/reporters? Yea right, my ass.
    28 replies | 693 view(s)
  • Weston White's Avatar
    17 replies | 1392 view(s)
  • Weston White's Avatar
    12-29-2016, 03:34 PM
    Sure, sure that must be it. No, you cannot simply decree what is otherwise a direct tax (on financial capital) as being a tax on its receipt rather than its ownership so as to otherwise circumvent constitutional prohibitions through mere word-craft, more than a few examples:
    40 replies | 926 view(s)
  • Weston White's Avatar
    12-29-2016, 01:58 PM
    Again, that is just not the truth. Such is in fact a general assessment imposed upon a specific classification of personal property (i.e., monetary capital or perhaps even room and board) realized within a specified tax period. This is no different than say a direct tax assessed upon one's number of windows or acres; or a head tax upon all persons of certain ages, genders, or heights and weights, and the like; or the (mischaracterized) poll registration taxes to vote. Additionally, for the average American wage-earner, their bi-weekly paychecks do in fact amount to the entirety of their whole assets--as most Americans, are only a few paychecks from homelessness, do not own their residence (or vehicle), and are forced to constantly pay down credit card debts. (The IRC does not bother to verify if this is in fact the case or not.) Furthermore, we have already established that (1) a tax imposed upon livelihoods and its subsequent receipt of wages or recompense (as a first form of intangible human capital) imposes a capitation and (2) a personal tax is a classified direct tax, which is a tax upon an individual's personal property or personalty. Oh and to indirectly tax that same object twice is to violate the double-taxation principle. Also, the imposition of direct taxes are not simply black and white, they may be craftily worked just as are indirect taxes.
    40 replies | 926 view(s)
  • Weston White's Avatar
    12-29-2016, 07:39 AM
    Welcome to the i-Jobs-whatever generation.
    7 replies | 376 view(s)
  • Weston White's Avatar
    12-29-2016, 07:28 AM
    The distinction between what is a direct tax or what is an indirect tax is rather simple. When the subject of taxation is also its tangible source it is being directly taxed; however, when the product (e.g., its fruit or realization) of the subject’s source is being taxed it is being taxed indirectly. That is to mean a tax upon a blooming apple tree is direct; however, a tax upon its falling apples is an indirect tax. Your example is not very well thought. As you owe the land tax regardless if you have gains or losses within your business activities and regardless of how many charges you took in. Further still, you (will likely) owe additional taxes on that extra money you are charging to cover your operating costs, including your land taxes. The same does not apply to indirect income or corporate taxes—ergo, if nobody is buying your crap, you owe no tax. Well, really you have the point of view of two interested parties, with a tax that is deemed to be due, so naturally the one paying will shout it to be a direct tax, while the other will label it an indirect tax upon them as they are no longer receiving the whole of the gifted/bequeathed property. But of course somebody has to pay the tax, and both parties ultimately realize a loss because of it. So estate and gift taxes are really about personal perspective, but have historically been known as excise taxes—just as historically, taxes upon laborers, including their wages, have been known as capitation or personal taxes.
    40 replies | 926 view(s)
  • Weston White's Avatar
    12-28-2016, 08:23 AM
    All direct taxes require apportionment—it is simply a matter of wrongfully arguing that because the source of the tax is not taxable unless apportioned then so must also be what grows out from the source; a matter resolved by the 16th Amend. Actually it was investment income from state bonds as being a direct tax upon the state being referenced within Pollock. Regardless, there is a vast and obvious distinction between taxing the gains of investments as income to the mere quid pro quo exchange of money (or property) for labor as a necessary means of livelihood and existence. Is it not highly profound that it is so very easy to define indirect taxes, but for direct taxes the matter remains mystical—which was even noted by Justice Scalia.
    40 replies | 926 view(s)
  • Weston White's Avatar
    12-28-2016, 08:23 AM
    Such is purely a misnomer to define a compliance failure—by failing to arrange for ongoing contractual purchases—as being a tax; such can only ever be properly defined as a fine or penalty—taxation is not a medium for which government might shape individual behavior or habits, it is purely to generate revenue so that the government may effectively function in and of itself and not its masses. Moreover, these funds are not actually earmarked for anything, thus, it is yet another desperately contrived taxing scheme intending to cover the government’s ever increasing trillion dollar spending debts, just as are the impending carbon and Internet taxes. ACA taxes exists entirely outside the government’s enumerated powers to levy indirect taxes, thereby it is blatantly unconstitutional. Unlawful taxation does not get more in your face than Obamacare taxation does. Matters of health and care are solely matters for the individual states to address, thereby ACA is again found unconstitutional. The ACA strips away the power of consumer-tax-payers to effectively negotiate with third-parties of their own free will, manage their own financial affairs, and impose consideration on their own personal situations. The ACA brings the government into the private and confidential affairs of private citizens; further granting them access to sensitive medical information and histories.
    40 replies | 926 view(s)
  • Weston White's Avatar
    12-28-2016, 12:29 AM
    See this proves Michael Scott is much, much more intelligent than Obama!
    49 replies | 1057 view(s)
  • Weston White's Avatar
    12-28-2016, 12:18 AM
    Delusions of grandeur, anybody? Trump be all like:
    3 replies | 232 view(s)
  • Weston White's Avatar
    12-27-2016, 01:57 AM
    The neo has and always will be in neo-Nazi, so it doesn't, nor will it ever need to be placed back you PhD twit. And really classy move, superimposing Hitler over Neo in The Matix. Stupid is as stupid does.
    12 replies | 445 view(s)
  • Weston White's Avatar
    12-25-2016, 11:56 PM
    Mutual combat is not a crime and self-defense is not a crime. ETA: Also, it should violate the 14th Amend. when states ratify statutes that provide multiplier penalties against people that commit like crimes against groups deemed "special" be it police officers or dogs, "minorities", handicapped, gays, etc.--though it may be a separate consideration when such is motivated solely by that reason, as a "hate crime."
    20 replies | 540 view(s)
More Activity
About ZENemy

Basic Information

Signature


"One thing my years in Washington taught me is that most politicians are followers, not leaders. Therefore we should not waste time and resources trying to educate politicians. Politicians will not support individual liberty and limited government unless and until they are forced to do so by the people," says Ron Paul."

Statistics


Total Posts
Total Posts
2,901
Posts Per Day
1.58
General Information
Last Activity
Today 12:21 PM
Join Date
01-02-2012
Referrals
1

2 Friends

  1. Root Root is offline

    Member

    Root
  2. Weston White Weston White is offline

    Member

    Weston White
Showing Friends 1 to 2 of 2
No results to display...
No results to display...
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

09-07-2016


09-06-2016


08-02-2016


07-23-2016


07-06-2016


06-06-2016


05-18-2016


05-13-2016


05-10-2016


05-04-2016


04-29-2016


04-28-2016


04-21-2016


03-23-2016



Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast