Find UFOs, The Apocalypse, New World Order, Political Analysis,
Alternative Health, Armageddon, Conspiracies, Prophecies,
Spirituality, Home Schooling, Home Mortgages and more, in:
Taxation is theft. But I’ve seen some people defend taxes with typical arguments like, “It’s not theft because you get something for your money.”
Perhaps the confusion lies in the fact that not all thieves act the same. There are at least three different types of theft in which the government engages.
1. The Con
The con artist cheats you out of your money. He makes you think you are getting something of value, or he tricks you into being robbed without your knowledge. Most people are conned into supporting taxation, assuming taxes are the price of civilization. They assume that is the way it has to be, and that taxes are justified because people get government services in return.
So when someone argues that taxes aren’t theft because you are getting something for your money, this is a con. Yes, the government maintains the roads, but both the price and delivery are the con. You must use the government to get the roads, you have no choice. The con artist convinces you roads could be built in no other way, and for no lower cost. The same goes for security, education, food safety, and so on.
And of course sometimes long after the government has taken your money, you realize that they never delivered on whatever promise they made: to keep you safe, to create more jobs, to strengthen the economy, to reduce crime etc. Think you’ll get your money back? Think again, you’ve been conned.
2. Extortion.
Maybe you see the con coming, as many of us do, and refuse to pay taxes. Well, then comes the extortion.
“You’ve got a nice home here, it would be a shame if someone seized it for back taxes. Come on man, don’t make us come back here, we’re not gonna be as nice next time around. You don’t have health insurance? What’s gonna happen if someone breaks your kneecaps? Pony up buddy.”
Those of us who aren’t conned into thinking taxes are necessary or proper generally pay because we don’t want the government to ruin our lives. It’s the classic mafia style, being forced to pay protection money, even though they are your largest threat. Sure they might keep other thugs off the block, but then again, they might not. Either way, you are going to pay, or they will hurt you in any way they can.
Ultimately, all taxes are collected under the threat of violence. Obtaining something through threats or force is extortion.
3. Armed Robbery.
Finally, if you refuse to play into the con, and you refuse to be extorted, you will face a home invasion, which is really the final phase of extortion. When your home is invaded you will either be kidnapped or killed, depending on your reaction to the assault, and the mood of your attackers.
Then they will take everything of value until the original amount they said you owed is paid, plus some extra for not cooperating. If they claimed you owed them an especially high figure, they will keep you caged as an example to others who refused to be extorted.
So yes, taxation is theft, and most people that disagree have been so easily conned that they simply think they haven’t been robbed. But they never bother to think about what would happen next if they didn’t accept the sham products and overprices services!
Being conned is theft: we are tricked into letting go of our money, or having it taken while we aren’t looking (like inflation). Extortion is clearly theft as well: the “alternative” of having your kneecaps broken or business burned down is no alternative at all, it is simply a method of having you turn over your money in order to avoid a violent attack. And armed robbery is clearly theft. You are in the midst of the violence and can no longer avoid it. You must turn over your money, or see the violence escalate until ultimately you are killed.
No matter how you slice it, taxation is theft.
Comments
muldoon55's picture
muldoon55 Nov 12, 2017 9:41 AM
We can find comfort from Gods word the Bible where it reveals what Jehovah God has in store for the corrupt governments.
Not the prophecy at Daniel 2:44
“In the days of those kings the God of heaven will set up a kingdom+ that will never be destroyed.+ And this kingdom will not be passed on to any other people.+ It will crush and put an end to all these kingdoms,+ and it alone will stand forever,
Imagine a heavenly government in the capable hands of Gods son Jesus Christ under which will a real brotherhood of man will exist.
No more thieving ,cheating , corrupt human government to obstruct ones pusuit of happiness.
However,in order to see this time of peace and security, action is required of each person. Note what our Heavenly Father Jehovah says about this in Zephaniah 2:2
Before the decree takes effect,Before the day passes by like chaff,Before the burning anger of Jehovah comes upon you,+Before the day of Jehovah’s anger comes upon you, 3 Seek Jehovah,+ all you meek ones* of the earth,Who observe his righteous decrees.* Seek righteousness, seek meekness.* Probably* you will be concealed on the day of Jehovah’s anger.+
muldoon55's picture
muldoon55 Nov 12, 2017 9:47 AM
We can find comfort from Gods word the Bible where it reveals what Jehovah God has in store for the corrupt governments.
Note the prophecy at Daniel 2:44
“In the days of those kings the God of heaven will set up a kingdom+ that will never be destroyed.+ And this kingdom will not be passed on to any other people.+ It will crush and put an end to all these kingdoms,+ and it alone will stand forever,
Imagine a heavenly government in the capable hands of Gods son Jesus Christ under which will a real brotherhood of man will exist.
No more thieving ,cheating , corrupt human government to obstruct ones pusuit of happiness.
However,in order to see this time of peace and security, action is required of each person. Note what our Heavenly Father Jehovah says about this in Zephaniah 2:2
Before the decree takes effect,Before the day passes by like chaff,Before the burning anger of Jehovah comes upon you,+Before the day of Jehovah’s anger comes upon you, 3 Seek Jehovah,+ all you meek ones* of the earth,Who observe his righteous decrees.* Seek righteousness, seek meekness.* Probably* you will be concealed on the day of Jehovah’s anger.+
So make Jehovah God the sovereign of your life by reading his word and trusting in Him and stop putting your trust in human kings wherin no salvation belongs
Hugh Mann's picture
Hugh Mann Nov 12, 2017 8:28 AM
There's a solution to everything. It begins with education. If you don't like paying taxes, educate yourself and stop.
Storm-Clouds's picture
Storm-Clouds Nov 11, 2017 11:57 PM
All taxes are theft.....
All tolls are theft....
All licenses are swindles
Live free or die.....
The dead don’t care.....
GoinFawr's picture
GoinFawr Storm-Clouds Nov 12, 2017 12:50 AM
Are tolls theft on privately owned bridges?
anonymike's picture
anonymike GoinFawr Nov 12, 2017 8:23 AM
Tolls are not theft if the bridge, roadway, tunnel or ferry was built with non-government money, on land that was not stolen in partnership with the criminals who call themselves government, and no special privileges were granted to the owners by government in exchange for money or favors. Some of the first roads, bridges, tunnels and ferries in the land currently known as usa were truly private enterprise and not some form of theft to some degree. This is either extremely rare or non-existent today.
GreatUncle's picture
GreatUncle anonymike Nov 12, 2017 11:34 AM
But then the government would not give you permission to build those items ... P2P corruption starts.
Hugh Mann's picture
Hugh Mann GoinFawr Nov 12, 2017 8:23 AM
We own the bridges! Corporations are legal fictions. They don't exist and since they don't exist, they can't own anything.
Colonel's picture
Colonel Nov 12, 2017 12:01 AM
This article is completely spot on.
“So identified has the State become in the public mind with the provision of these services,” Rothbard laments, “that an attack on State financing appears to many people as an attack on the service itself.” The libertarian who wants to get the government out of a certain business is “treated in the same way as he would be if the government had, for various reasons, been supplying shoes as a tax-financed monopoly from time immemorial.”
If everyone had always gotten their shoes from the government, writes Rothbard, the proponent of shoe privatization would be greeted as a kind of lunatic. “How could you?” defenders of the status quo would squeal. “You are opposed to the public, and to poor people, wearing shoes! And who would supply shoes . . . if the government got out of the business? Tell us that! Be constructive! It’s easy to be negative and smart-alecky about government; but tell us who would supply shoes? Which people? How many shoe stores would be available in each city and town? . . . What material would they use? . . . Suppose a poor person didn’t have the money to buy a pair?”
Besides goobermint ALREADY contracts/hires the private sector companies to do practically everything for them anyway. What do expect a parasite to do, admit its not needed!?
GoinFawr's picture
GoinFawr Nov 11, 2017 10:44 PM
" Taxes are theft? Hunh, maybe, though I've never once had a mugger literally rob me and then use his ill gotten booty to build me a road for my own private business to use and profit from...also, me and mine haven't had to train an employee to read, even those that were orphaned as children, since before the industrial revolution. And all that is not to mention the convenience of a publicly funded judicial system that at least provides recourse, if not always justice/remuneration, for me when I percieve another party's breach of our signed contracts. "- A Capitalist who recognizes the actual price of doing business, and doesn't mind paying taxes (to some states); even though we all know I would spend it better, because capitalism.
ps
And remember kids: when it comes to pollution, dilution is the solution! Regulations just get in the way of achieving the right mix! Also, smoking isn't bad for you; Cures warts! And all GMO's are golly-gee, whizz-bang tasty, so you don't need the low hanging fruit of 'perfect knowledge' on the label! Lead jewellery is totally safe, and you can barely tell it isn't silver until your kid chews the cadmium coating off of it!
/sarc off
TDB is such a whiner: "...being alive and OschKochBro'Goch wealthy is so unfair to them, schmeeeeee."
The article and its two-bit 'memes' read like a sycophant's paycheque relies on suckers buying them...
Anonymous_Beneficiary's picture
Anonymous_Benef... GoinFawr Nov 11, 2017 11:17 PM
Are you of the position that it is not theft when the thief gives you back a portion of the proceeds stolen from you?
Clearly you are the product of the public fool system, friend.
Oh yeah, and capitalism hasn't existed for over 100 years. So what are you, a surviving robber baron, or sumpin?
GoinFawr's picture
GoinFawr Anonymous_Beneficiary Nov 12, 2017 2:05 AM
"Oh yeah, and capitalism hasn't existed for over 100 years"
Except that there were gov'ts and taxation too in those long lost days of the olden times
I'm in the 'position' of facing reality. Capitalism is alive and well despite taxation, thank you very much; good thing too. It just wants mitigation, like any other powerful tool.
Gov'ts are just tools too, very like guns: they don't kill people, people kill people. With guns, sometimes.
"Are you of the position that it is not theft when the thief gives you back a portion of the proceeds stolen from you"
Oh yea I am always hearing the story about some jogger whose mugger returned to pay for their victim's hospital bills the next day, aren't you?
Anyway, Tools don't steal, people steal. Civil servants are hired to do a job, if they do it competently are they stealing?
Ever since there have been enough people to enable clever sociopaths there has been public oversight; gov't. And yes, probably more often than not the clever sociopaths ended up being the ones in charge rather than having a system that mitigated them, but not always. If you are obsessed with perfection go worship an flying spaghetti monster who will tell you how you'll be far better off once you're dead, or something equally moronic.
I mean if you want to view the entire history of human civilisation as 'one big shit sandwich' that's your cognitive bias; so sorry about your bite this time around.
GreatUncle's picture
GreatUncle GoinFawr Nov 12, 2017 11:32 AM
Capitalism is preached by the 1% and why they have all the wealth ...
It just so happens and the 1% created the system that the ordinary person is forced to live as a socialist having everything stolen to be redistributed to somebody else.
The like of Soros, Buffet do not lose everything to be redistributed to others do they? Capitalist ...
So you pay all your taxes and nothing left over and you get nothing back for it? Socialist bullshit ...
ImGumbydmmt's picture
ImGumbydmmt GoinFawr Nov 12, 2017 7:53 AM
actually.
there was no income tax or social security tax until the 20th century.
Income tax under Woodrow Wislon, along with the Federal reserve. and Social security under FDR.
the FIRST state was a sales tax was West Virginia in 1921
The first state police force was in 1904 in Pennsylvania.
Money was real gold and silver until 1933, and we still had silver coins until 1963.
So YES, there were FAR less taxes 100 years ago and FAR less Government.
Our grandfathers and great grandfathers who fought WWII, grew up as children in an america that was "mostly" free of these evils.
They had a real vision of freedom, which was placed on them by their parents.
WE have NONE of that, UNLESS we study our history.
Which You, kind Sir, have proven, that you, like most americans do not.
Xena fobe's picture
Xena fobe Nov 11, 2017 9:55 PM
Voters can be continuously conned. They have short memories. Tbey forget the unfilled promises and believe the answer to everything is throwing more money at govt. The best example is the sheep in California lining up to be sheared.
Voters never stop to consider all the new taxes constantly being added to existing ones either.
We probably get 10% of what we pay for.
GreatUncle's picture
GreatUncle Xena fobe Nov 12, 2017 11:29 AM
You would probably find 20% or more get nothing for their taxes at all. Hold your hand up if
<< You get a free EBT card somebody else paid for.
<< Get diddly squat.
Arrow4Truth's picture
Arrow4Truth Xena fobe Nov 11, 2017 10:59 PM
That's an adequate explanation for insanity.
GoinFawr's picture
GoinFawr Xena fobe Nov 12, 2017 12:28 AM
and the other ~90% goes to international banqing interests, whom you have allowed your state employees to empower as your masters by making you and yours their debt slaves for generations to come.
Aireannpure's picture
Aireannpure Nov 11, 2017 7:52 PM
The deep state at it's finest.
Aireannpure's picture
Aireannpure Nov 11, 2017 7:51 PM
The deep state at it's finest.
tangent's picture
tangent Nov 11, 2017 7:17 PM
We can't have food without the government. Oh wait, I have food without the government. We can't have clothing without the government. Oh wait, I have clothing without government help. We can't have roads without the government? Really, I have a property on a private road without the government. And frankly my government education probably just set me back. I'm an intelligent person, but the government had nothing to do with it.
The OVERLY SIMPLISTIC THINKING is that we cannot have roads or education without stealing other people's things to have it. NO! Hong Kong has the LOWEST TAX RATES IN THE WORLD. Do they have worse schools than their neighbors? Do they have worse roads than their neighbors? If you don't know the answer to this question, then you are making up an argument with no basis in fact.
Life involves having facts and evidence. You can't just say "without taxes blah blah blah". No, you have no idea. But we have a lot to go on by comparing places with really high taxes (Venezuela for example) with places with really low taxes, like Hong Kong for example. Hong Kong is the ONLY low tax place that I know of on the planet Earth. So by the "taxation isn't theft argument" their education and roads should be of lower quality. Do your due diligence and report back. I personally am very unhappy about the quality and features of my public roads. I'm personally very unhappy about the quality of US education.
Common_Law's picture
Common_Law tangent Nov 11, 2017 9:47 PM
A lot of the early main roads were made by turnpike companies around me. Then the gov just took over maintenance and upgrades.
Anonymous_Beneficiary's picture
Anonymous_Benef... tangent Nov 11, 2017 8:27 PM
I think you're spot on although it's really a minimal tax and government argument you appear to be making rather than no tax/govt.
I'm tempted to say I'm in also favor of minimal government but unfortunately that never seems to be a lasting proposition...heweman nature, and all..so I prefer no government other than self government i.e. do no harm.
Setarcos's picture
Setarcos Nov 11, 2017 6:47 PM
Good luck building your own road and defending your own property, or ensuring that you are not cheated with weights and measures.
Your thinking is WAY too simplistic. You wouldn't have a clue how to build a road, raise finances, get neighbours to agree/help, obtain and operate machinery, survey levels, etc..
Whatever the faults of bureaucracies, police, etc., no one can turn up on your property and seize it, if he is better armed than you.
When you buy goods you assume that the weight and contents are displayed accurately, that's taken care of by government departments.
There is ignorance about a myriad aspects of life you take foregranted , like being able to flick a light switch,which involves government organisation/
/regulation/safety standards.
In large, complex civilisations governments and taxes are unavoidable necessities. There is NO historical exception.
Now if you want to argue that corruption taints the whole system, go for it. If you want to point out that because of corrupt politicians, private banks (under the Fed) control the money supply and create it out of thin air, then persuade governments to borrow at interest, rather than rely on tax revenue, then you are on to something.
If you want to point out that, now, about 60% of tax revenue goes on just paying interest - so that there is not enough left over for infrastructure, for instance - then there's a crusade in the making, e.g. for state banks issuing sovereign currency without interest, or just enough to cover expenses and which go back in the system anyway (See Ellen Brown).
Just writing an ill-informed ideological piece achieves nothing, except maybe some clapping from the choir.
Common_Law's picture
Common_Law Setarcos Nov 11, 2017 9:43 PM
Flicking on a switch approved by underwriters laboratories...
Anonymous_Beneficiary's picture
Anonymous_Benef... Setarcos Nov 11, 2017 8:39 PM
No one can turn up on your property and seize it, if he is better armed than you?
LOL...oh boy, i guess it's not immoral when the armed people showing up to throw you on the street for not paying your property taxes...call themselves a government.
Setarcos's picture
Setarcos Anonymous_Beneficiary Nov 12, 2017 10:49 AM
You cite a very rare occurence. I bet that you'd struggle to come up with a few examples. Btw I would love it if we could devolve to living in small communities. Tribes and villages did not need governments-as-such, everyone knew everyone else and kept each other honest, though if some invading army appeared, that was the end of it ... as has successively happened over the centuries. Now we cannot go back. Millions of people live in cities and no one really knows anyone else, often not really even family members. In these circumstances, of civilisation, governments and bureaucracies have ALWAYS emerged. Whether one likes it or not - I don't much - theorising about some utopian absence of government is to reject historical reality. It's almost cognitive dissonance and certainly denial. Maybe when the current civilisation collapses devolution will occur somehow, though hopefully not as chaotic and brutal as after the collapse of Rome.
new guy's picture
new guy Setarcos Nov 11, 2017 8:01 PM
In large, complex civilisations governments and taxes are unavoidable necessities. There is NO historical exception.
What about Detroit? Belgium??
Anonymous_Beneficiary's picture
Anonymous_Benef... new guy Nov 11, 2017 8:19 PM
Every time we deem an action to be good and beautiful, we should like, quite naturally, to see it made the general practice. Now, when we see in society a force to which all gives way, our first impulse is to enlist its aid by decreeing the action and imposing it on everyone. But the question is whether one does not thereby degrade both the nature of this force and the nature of the action, rendering legally obligatory what was essentially spontaneous and voluntary. As far as I am concerned, I cannot get it into my head that the law, which is force, can be usefully applied to any purpose other than repressing wrongs and maintaining rights.
I have just described a nation where this would be the case. Let us suppose, now, that among the people of this nation the opinion prevailed that the law should no longer be limited to imposing justice; that it should aspire further to impose fraternity.??
What will happen? It will not take me long to tell, for the reader has only to remake the preceding picture in reverse.
At first a frightful uncertainty, a deadly insecurity, will hover over the whole domain of private activity; for fraternity can express itself in billions of unknown forms and, consequently, billions of unforeseen decrees. Innumerable proposals will each day come to threaten all established relations. In the name of fraternity someone will demand equality of wage rates, whereupon the working classes will be reduced to the status of Indian castes; neither ability nor courage nor assiduity nor intelligence will be able to raise them up again: a leaden law will weigh them down. This world will be a Dante's inferno to them: Abandon all hope, [128] ye who enter. In the name of fraternity another will demand that the working day be reduced to ten, eight, six, four hours; whereupon production will be forthwith brought to a halt. As there will be no more bread to appease hunger, nor cloth to protect men against the cold, a third will propose replacing bread and cloth by legal tender paper money. Do we not buy things with money? To multiply money, he will say, is to multiply bread and cloth; to multiply paper is to multiply money. Q.E.D. A fourth will require that competition be abolished by decree; a fifth, that self-interest be eliminated by law; this one will want the state to provide work; that one, education; and another, pensions for all citizens. Still another would dethrone all the kings on earth, and decree, in the name of fraternity, universal war. I stop here. It is quite evident that, if we take this path, the supply of utopias is inexhaustible. They will be rejected, it will be said. Granted; but it is possible that they will not be; and this suffices to create uncertainty, the greatest scourge of labor.
Under this system, capital cannot be formed. It will be rare, dear, and concentrated in a few hands. This means that wages will be reduced, and that inequality will open up a continually widening gulf between the social classes.
It will not be long before the public finances reach a state of complete disorder. How could it be otherwise when the state is responsible for furnishing everything to everybody? The people will be crushed under the burden of taxes; loan after loan will be floated; after having drained the present, the state will devour the future.
-Bastiat
NoPension's picture
NoPension Nov 11, 2017 6:01 PM
And this doesn't even get into the FACT of taking from some, and GIVING it to others.
After taking a nice skim, before passing it on.
Anonymous_Beneficiary's picture
Anonymous_Benef... NoPension Nov 11, 2017 6:08 PM
Not to mention it's the poor who are being taken from in a reverse Robin Hood scenario.
Remember Uncle Warren paying less in taxes than his secretary?
So now you want to base your analysis on a meaningless dog-and-pony show? That attempt to provide "analysis" is beyond pathetic.
Anonymous_Beneficiary's picture
Anonymous_Benef... Nov 11, 2017 6:05 PM
All that's necessary for a gang of criminals to legitimize their plunder, is to declare themselves a government. To wit:
"What gang of robbers, quarrelling over the division of their plunder, could exhibit a more shameful picture than you thus acknowledge to be shown by the government of the United States?"
Anonymous_Beneficiary's picture
Anonymous_Benef... Nov 11, 2017 5:58 PM
Government...with ideas so wonderful, they had to make them mandatory.
RedBaron616's picture
RedBaron616 Nov 11, 2017 4:06 PM
Find a government that doesn't run on taxes. How else should it fund itself, eBay? Get real. The issue isn't taxes, it is high and ever-increasing taxes.
GreatUncle's picture
GreatUncle RedBaron616 Nov 12, 2017 11:26 AM
If the government offers you nothing of worth let those who benefit from the service pay for it.
The ever increasing taxes is through more and more services that are worthless to the ordinary citizen.
anonymike's picture
anonymike RedBaron616 Nov 12, 2017 8:37 AM
It is the basic nature of all central forms of government beyond the most local level (the state) to become evil. This is because those levers of power over people and resources are always sought out by the most evil people in society. The larger the state, the more evil it becomes. Therefore, those levers of power should not be allowed to exist at any level.
The world will be an unimaginably better place when rid of the states at all levels. To secure these rights of life, liberty and property, people don't need government beyond the most local level where they can assure it serves its only honest purpose. That minimal level of government can be run with volunteers and donations that are not extorted.
So, you appear to be saying that there is no alternative to oppressive taxes. If you want a system like that then there you go! But to declare there is no alternative is beyond ignorant and stupid.
VWAndy's picture
VWAndy RedBaron616 Nov 11, 2017 4:10 PM
A smaller government could do its funding in much better ways.
RafterManFMJ's picture
RafterManFMJ VWAndy Nov 11, 2017 5:43 PM
Like a tariff
anonymike's picture
anonymike RafterManFMJ Nov 12, 2017 8:39 AM
Tariffs are theft too
VWAndy's picture
VWAndy Nov 11, 2017 12:00 PM
So is inflation of the coin. Quite the racket.
GreatUncle's picture
GreatUncle VWAndy Nov 12, 2017 11:23 AM
The forced CB inflation is to steal half your worth every 10 years (actually less now).
Then sales taxes on goods 10%, 20% in the UK on all you spend.
It becomes very simple to understand how you will be held in poverty all your life if you do not earn enough to cross the threshhold of having an excess to reinvest all your life. (that is where the 1% are now and skimming the system).
Radical reform is "you only pay for those services you use and you are allowed not to pay if you do not use them".
All possible in the modern world and no more freebies so you do not have to pay extortion for things you will never receive.
Common_Law's picture
Common_Law VWAndy Nov 11, 2017 8:27 PM
It's clever how the law/code cons people into liability.
There's 3 separate legal definitions of "united states" according to the supreme court in 1948(50 states, DC + fed. territories, both together). The only way to tell sometimes is with grammar rules. United states is Vs united states are.
VWAndy's picture
VWAndy Common_Law Nov 11, 2017 11:41 PM
The conflicting laws thing is pretty messed up to.
Anonymous_Beneficiary's picture
Anonymous_Benef... Common_Law Nov 11, 2017 8:42 PM
Get to the point...none of these laws or constitutions apply to anyone...I would love to see some factual proof to the contrary. It's just an assumption. THat which is asserted w.out evidence can just as easily dismissed without evidence.
Common_Law's picture
Common_Law Anonymous_Beneficiary Nov 11, 2017 9:22 PM
The way they typically establish control is through jusistiction. Aka you live in my "kingdom" you're under my rules. Jurisdiction is established by domicile (not residence) you can only have one domicile and that's where you live. People are convinced it applies when people go to jail or are intimidated by power.
There's not much to apply to people if you're not in federal jurisdiction or federal residence. Except property taxes which is a different legal con.
Anonymous_Beneficiary's picture
Anonymous_Benef... Common_Law Nov 11, 2017 11:41 PM
Yes, the proposition is that because I'm physically in Ohio, the constition and therefore laws of the state of Ohio apply to me.
But what facts support the assertion? What facts make the constitution apply to me or you?
There is really nothing to support that claim. Which means "they" don't have power or jurisdiction over you or I unless we offer our consent.
Now is it any longer a wonder why there appears to be two sets of laws, one for "them" and another for you? Didn't Shrub say "The constitution is just a goddamned piece of paper"? Did that not sink in yet?
Always keep the burden of proof where it belongs..on the one claiming that the constitions and laws apply to you because you're physically in such and such...because you know...magic!
Main Entry: tango
Function: noun
Etymology: American Spanish
Date: 1913
1 : a ballroom dance of Latin-American origin in 2/4 time with a basic pattern of step-step-step-step-close and characterized by long pauses and stylized body positions; also : the music for this dance
2 : interaction marked by a lack of straightforwardness *the suspect's tango with police*
RMN is an RA production.
The only pay your RMN moderators receive comes from ads.
If you're using an ad blocker, please consider putting RMN in your ad blocker's whitelist.
Serving Truth and Freedom
Worldwide since 1996
Politically Incorrect News
Stranger than Fiction
Usually True!
