Is U.S. income tax invalid?

Parados,
The part about the shovel, jar and buried body, now that I find to be very funny !!!!!

All of his arguments have been thoroughly and repeatedly rejected by the courts, in large part because his arguments are so stupid that, if stupid were measured in Twinkies, and the amount of stupid in the average stupid argument was the size of a regular Twinkie, then the Twinkie that would represent the amount of stupid in Bill Benson's stupid argument (and, by extension, Bob Schulz's stupid argument) would equal the size of the Crab Nebula.

And that's a big Twinkie.

<- Joe

Joe delivers delicious small twinkies for everyone..

Thanks Joe.

Sometimes Twinkies have a fun filling. But at the size of the Crab nebula they will clog the arteries no matter how fun the filling.

Not only that, but twinkies have a shelf-life equivalent to the half-life of lead.

Setanta,
Can I ask you a question?

Certainly you can ask me a question, you've just done so. What is more siginficant, however, is whether or not i'd answer--if anyone really cares.

I would not ask if I did not care. I was just wondering if you smiled at all today.

The question is tendentious and insipid--and therefore, i will not answer it.

I never heard of those words before so I had to look them up. My question has a tendacy to be dull. That is what it means? If you choose to answer of course.

Your question is tendentious because it is predicated upon any one of several assumptions, which assumptions are also insipid. It assumes a utility or benefit which derives to the individual from smiling--many people smile not only when they are not happy, but even when they are distressed or fearful. One cannot assume that smiling axiomatically has intrinsic value in and of itself. It assumes that smiling is an activity in which i so uncommonly engage that there is a point in asking me if i have smiled on any given day. You have not asked if i have grimaced today, you have not asked me if i have glared today. Just what sort of useful information do you allege you would gain from knowing whether or not i had smiled today? Finally, i infer that you believe that some benefit accrues to you by asking me this question--in short, you remind of those people i have met in life who have witlessly stuck their faces in mine and adjured me to smile. It so often seems they consider themselves to be some sort of beneficent force in society. To me, they are merely obnoxious people who are sufficiently self-absorbed as not to realize that other people will smile--or grimace--based upon their personal reactions to their environment and experience, and that no purpose is served by annoyingly intruding one's ego into said victim's life.

The most important reason why i consider your question insipid is that i strongly suspect that you ask because of some delusion under which you operate which has convinced you that you are doing the world, or any given individual, some kind of favor by assailing them with such meaningless questions. In short, i think you are behaving egocentrically, but attempting to falsely portray yourself as someone who cares about your fellows.

You are right I did assume when I asked if you smiled. I smile even when I am sad. I guess I am naive in that I do care. I do care about people and it is not under any false pretense. I do not even know why I care since most people do not. I guess I like to see other people happy. I will not bother you with anymore questions.
I also came by to show you my dog since you have one in your picture. So, I will put my happy face back on today and I hope you have a nice New Years Eve. I say that with sincerity.

Nice doggy . . . i like doggies . . . much more than i like humans.

I have no doubt that you are sincere in your wishing others well. I also have no doubt that you have deluded yourself that this is altruism on your part.

You are nothing to me--just as i am nothing to you. The totality of our experiences of one another is witnessing the effect of electrons on the photo-reactive screens before which we sit. That you are nothing to me does not mean that i wish you ill--it simply means that i have no reason to wish you ill or well. Inasmuch as i have no grudge against you, and am generally an affable man, i am willing to wish you a happy new year. After all, it costs me nothing to do so.

You have crossed the Rubicon with this missive, it is clear you are messing with my mind. I have no other recourse open to me due to the disappearance of Twinkies, than to report this ingression to my fizzercyissist.

You made Set's day when you typed those words.



I have seen nothing that would tend to validate this statement.

"Nice doggy . . . i like doggies . . . much more than i like humans."

I feel compelled in the interest of historical accuracy to place in the public domain the following account, which proves this was not always so…

It was foretold that Setanta, a nephew of King Conor Mac Neasa of Ulster, was destined for greatness, and as he grew older it became evident that this prophecy was to be fulfilled. The boy had gained knowledge and performed feats unusual for one of his age. At the age of five years he decided to join the Boys` Corps at the court of his uncle, King Conor. He set out for his uncle`s court at Emain Macha on foot, taking with him his hurling stick of bronze and a silver sliotar. He shortened many a mile by hurling the sliotar and throwing the hurley stick after it. He would run like the wind after them and catch them before they landed. In this way he soon arrived at Emain Macha. King Conor and the boys of the corps were astonished by his prowess on the hurling field. He could score with ease and when it was his turn to guard the goal, not one shot did he let in.

King Conor was invited to a banquet at the house of Culainn and he asked Setanta to accompany him. Setanta was playing a game of hurling at the time and told his uncle he would go to the banquet after the game. His uncle agreed to this and went on his own to the house of Culainn. When the guests were seated at the feast, Culainn asked the King if all the expected guests had arrived and the King replied that they had, forgetting all about Setanta. Culainn then unchained his magnificent hound to guard the house. Setanta arrived at Culainn`s house and the hound bayed like thunder and immediately sprang at him. Setanta, who had only his hurling stick and sliotar with him, hurled the ball with colossal force at the hound. The ball went into the gaping jaws of the huge animal and down into its throat. The hound was forced back by the pain of the blow. Immediately Setanta grabbed the hound by its legs and smashed its head on the stone courtyard. When Conor heard the hound baying he remembered Setanta and he rushed outside expecting to find him torn to pieces. He was overjoyed to see him unharmed.

Culainn was sorrowful at the loss of his hound which had guarded his home so well. Setanta consoled him and said he would find a young hound and train it to guard Culainn`s house. He volunteered to guard Cullain`s house and property himself until a worthy successor to the slain hound was found. King Conor decreed this to be fair. Thus, Setanta became known as Cuchulainn - the hound of Culainn.

I'm the ONLY one who gets to make Setanta's day.

That's the way it works.

< and the greasemonkey goes back into action >

But do you make him smile?

Hi Setanta,
No questions, no assumptions. Just stopped to say hi.

Has anyone grimaced today?
I'm pretty sure I did.