Taxation without representation?

[68Charger]

If legislation that spends tax dollars is passed while knowingly against the will of the people (majority is clearly against it, but legislative & executive branches ram it through anyway), then is history repeating itself?

As I understand it, "no taxation without representation" is not guaranteed by the constitution- it was in the English "Bill of Rights" at the time of the Boston Tea Party.. But is the current administration directly responsible for the creation of a new TEA Party by ignoring history?

Sure the players are different, but the same "virtual representation" folly exists if the representatives deliberately ignore the will of their constituents..

Is this covered by the possibility that we can vote out those that failed representation? or is it simply irrelevant, since we are not granted that right by the letter of the law?

Discuss...

[theGinsue]

I've already brought up the idea of ongoing taxation without representation in another thread so I know what you are saying and I agree with it.

I believe that having the ability to vote out the garbage to what is considered our protection against tyranny these days; even if voter fraud is rampant.

Many folks don't know that the President can declare a "national emergency" and use that to delay or cancel scheduled elections by Executive Order.

That would never happen?

In December, Senatorial aides from many Democratic U.S. Senators were in the basement library of the U.S. Capital building and they were overheard discussing their current mission - to find the best way to allow President Barrack Obama to declare a national emergency to indefinitely delay the November 2010 elections (Source: valid, trustworthy, but will not release).

Sounds like prime tin-foil hat stuff doesn't it? I'd agree if I didn't know the validity of the source.

Now, would THAT be enough to constitute "taxation without representation"? What do you suppose the public's reaction would be? I can't imagine it would be good.