Proof that Social Security violates US Constitution

[Hammurab]

I didn't want to derail the revolution thread, so I'm opening up a new thread on how Social Security violates the US Constitution.

The principal (and indisputable) evidence that Social Security is illegal under the Constitution comes from the following case:

Unecht v. United States, 912 U.S. 012 (1937) wherein it was held by the Court that Social Security violated Article I, Section 9, paragraph 4, word 1 - 9, minus the words after that.

While Justice Benjamin Cardozo argued elegantly in his dissenting opinion that Congress was empowered to levy taxes for the purposes of programs for the general welfare of the United States citizenry, he poisoned his own argument by heavy reliance on regard for the poor, crippled, and elderly as being actual citizens. He further surrenders what little credibility he had as a jurist by conflating the term "welfare" with things like the well being of the populace.

Chief Justice Charles Hughes expressed a far sounder sentiment in his landmark majority opinion, wherein he states in part, "Fuck 'em. Fuck the poor. Fuck 'em in the ear. They don't pay taxes, they don't bring their own horse when called to war, and just fuck 'em. Fuck the poor, fuck the blind, fuck the old if they can't get their own shit together. Says right fuckin' there in the 10th Amendment, 'The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.' This obviously includes the god given right to get fucked. Don't like it? Don't be poor. Don't go blind, don't get crippled, don't get old. We shouldn't have to tell people such profoundly self-evident shit. I mean, fuckin' Christ."

Anyway, I'm sure some people will fail to grasp this, and engage in ad hominem attacks against me, but remember, I know all about Constitution Law. I think I'm taking it this semester, I'm not sure because class starts thursday and I haven't really looked at my schedule yet. But I go to one of the top 80 ranked ABA accredited law schools in this country, and the only one Las Vegas.

Ya'll better recognize.

[Straughn]

I recognize, I do, I do ... i recognize a lot of people are liable to bite on this one.
Have fun.

[Christmahanikwanzikah]

I predict 12 pages of nonsense and silly arguing, followed by a lock.

There, I said it, that must make me a prophet... yo.

[Christmahanikwanzikah]

Or, on the offhand chance Hammurab is a badass motherfucker, something less mod-related will happen.

[Hammurab]

I recognize, I do, I do ... i recognize a lot of people are liable to bite on this one.
Have fun.

Straughn, you tried to refute me on my thread "Proof that the US is a Christian Nation", and got utterly shredded. You know very little about the law, aside from your single pro se defense on the charge of carrying a concealed weapon. Considering what you had to show the jury to prove you weren't carrying a gun in your pants, it was hardly demonstrative of thorough versing in case law, especially not at this level.

Please stop your ad hominem attacks.

[Samatolian City-States]

I'm going to ignore the OP's satire altogether and state my opinion on Social Security, which is as follows:

If there is any question as to whether you could get your money back that you paid into Social Security, they must be doing something wrong over in Washington.

[North Suran]

Please stop your ad hominem attacks.

"Ad hominem" is the new "strawman" in terms of "fancy phrases people like to throw around in debates without proper context or understanding".

[Christmahanikwanzikah]

Please stop your ad hominem attacks.

"Ad hominem" is the new "strawman" in terms of "fancy phrases people like to throw around in debates without proper context or understanding".

That's nonsensical hyperbole and you know it.

[Hammurab]

I predict 12 pages of nonsense and silly arguing, followed by a lock.

There, I said it, that must make me a prophet... yo.

I notice you present no cogent argument refuting me.

They haven't locked the US armed revolution thread, and if you check its most recent pages, what I'm explaining is hardly sillier.

[Barringtonia]

I've good evidence that Hammurab himself violates the US Constitution, on a nightly basis, I have it on video and would link it here but it's quite disgusting and I suspect it's not allowed under forum rules,

[Christmahanikwanzikah]

I've good evidence that Hammurab himself violates the US Constitution, on a nightly basis, I have it on video and would link it here but it's quite disgusting and I suspect it's not allowed under forum rules,

...

Please tell me it's not the 4th Amendment.

[Sdaeriji]

Please stop your ad hominem attacks.

"Ad hominem" is the new "strawman" in terms of "fancy phrases people like to throw around in debates without proper context or understanding".

I look forward to the day when poisoning the well becomes the next strawman-to-ad-hominem. It was always my favorite.

[Barringtonia]

I've good evidence that Hammurab himself violates the US Constitution, on a nightly basis, I have it on video and would link it here but it's quite disgusting and I suspect it's not allowed under forum rules,

...

Please tell me it's not the 4th Amendment.

That section does get stained, I think you're missing the point that he's actually violating the Constitution, using it much as a teenager would use a gym sock, Hammurab is the night janitor at the National Archives and Records Administration

[Hammurab]

Please stop your ad hominem attacks.

"Ad hominem" is the new "strawman" in terms of "fancy phrases people like to throw around in debates without proper context or understanding".

You continue to make ad hominem attacks against me, and now add non sequitors and bestia contactus to your fallacies.

If you can't address the point, please leave the thread.

[UNIverseVERSE]

You're back.

Or at least an imitator of you is back.

That's nice.

[Hammurab]

I've good evidence that Hammurab himself violates the US Constitution, on a nightly basis, I have it on video and would link it here but it's quite disgusting and I suspect it's not allowed under forum rules,

I will not apologize or ask forgiveness for loving the US Constitution. For really, truly loving it.

[North Suran]

Please stop your ad hominem attacks.

"Ad hominem" is the new "strawman" in terms of "fancy phrases people like to throw around in debates without proper context or understanding".

You continue to make ad hominem attacks against me, and now add non sequitors and bestia contactus to your fallacies.

If you can't address the point, please leave the thread.

The use of the word "continue" implies I have made multiple ad hominem attack against you, when I have not even made a one; I merely observed the fact that people on these forums like to throw around the term "ad hominem" like candy.

"Ad hominem" is the new "strawman" in terms of "fancy phrases people like to throw around in debates without proper context or understanding".

That's nonsensical hyperbole and you know it.

Please tell me that was wry wit.

[Christmahanikwanzikah]

I've good evidence that Hammurab himself violates the US Constitution, on a nightly basis, I have it on video and would link it here but it's quite disgusting and I suspect it's not allowed under forum rules,

I will not apologize or ask forgiveness for loving the US Constitution. For really, truly loving it.

It takes a true patriot to leave his John Handcock on it, I won't deny that.

[Hammurab]

That section does get stained, I think you're missing the point that he's actually violating the Constitution, using it much as a teenager would use a gym sock, Hammurab is the night janitor at the National Archives and Records Administration

You're going to get my thread locked. Stop making ad hominem attacks!

[The Black Forrest]

Got a link

Unecht v. United States

Is not turning up on a search.

[Straughn]

Straughn, you tried to refute me on my thread "Proof that the US is a Christian Nation", and got utterly shredded.

You were on that? You must have the nom de guerre to conceal your true identity as The Holy Spirit. I sure as shaol felt something moving in me, to paraphrase Leonard Cohen.

You know very little about the law

Not gravity. I know far, far too much about that one. And a little about averages and even less about Boyle's. Funny how they all kinda tied together in the same great character-building experiences.

aside from your single pro se defense on the charge of carrying a concealed weapon. Considering what you had to show the jury to prove you weren't carrying a gun in your pants, it was hardly demonstrative of thorough versing in case law, especially not at this level.

Can I help it they had me facing the other direction at the time? I was bitching about being sworn in on anything other than Ambrose Bierce.

Please stop your ad hominem attacks.

I was following some football commentator's advice. Best game in town.

[Straughn]

I've good evidence that Hammurab himself violates the US Constitution, on a nightly basis, I have it on video and would link it here but it's quite disgusting and I suspect it's not allowed under forum rules,

+
posting.php?mode=quote&f=20&p=455010
How else can we be a jury of peers if we don't share in the experience?

[Colonic Immigration]

I'm

[Hammurab]

The use of the word "continue" implies I have made multiple ad hominem attack against you, when I have not even made a one; I merely observed the fact that people on these forums like to throw around the term "ad hominem" like candy.


Please tell me that was wry wit.

You have made multiple ad hominem attacks against me, counting these two. That makes three. Look up the word "multiple".

Moreso, that last comment was a pullus inexpugnabilis fallacy.

I'll kindly ask you again, if you can't refrain from personal attacks and address the actual legal argument, please leave the thread.

[Christmahanikwanzikah]

"Ad hominem" is the new "strawman" in terms of "fancy phrases people like to throw around in debates without proper context or understanding".

That's nonsensical hyperbole and you know it.

Please tell me that was wry wit.

I initially intended inane innuendo.

See, I can alliterate too.