Quote Originally Posted by Weston White View Post
Mr. Evans’ “analysis” on the matter presently held in debate is itself a fallacy fulfillment of inaccuracy. His “Tax Protester FAQ” is a contrivance of warped reckoning.
Mr. White, you continue to fail to cite any inaccuracies on Mr. Evans' site. This isn't surprising, since there aren't any.

4. Presuming that the federal income tax was intended to tax the source as well as its growth, then it is still an unconstitutional method of taxation, as even though apportionment be not required, the requirement for exigent circumstances is withstanding under such a direct form of taxation upon such sources, aside from the indirect taxing of the source’s growth.
The Constitution doesn't require "exigent circumstances". Really, you should take time to actually read the language of the Constitution instead of trying to insert into it stuff that isn't there.