The Truth About Ron Paul - Part 2

Windsblow said:
I am not for one second saying that the slaves should wait but I am just pointing out that hindsight is clear and we should be honest about what reality is. I just know that we could had freed the slaves, upheld the laws of the land, and protected individual liberties. Instead they shredded the document that freed a world, centralized powers, destroyed the liberties of the individual and killed 600,000 people in the name of lies.
Click to expand...

And you do realize that this was entirely the confederacy's fault right? Instead of negotiating terms in a national debate, they left and attacked the united states.

But I am just a crazy foil hat lunatic making up history.
Click to expand...

indeed
 
Dan Kone said:
Yeah, because that was kind of the main point.



It is when the businesses in nearly half the country are systematically oppressing a race of people. Yes, it is oppression to say "sorry, your skin color makes you not good enough to sleep at this hotel".

I don't think the right to be racist is an essential right. I think the rights of black folks to be treated as equals is more important than the rights of business owners to be racists. It's about priorities. Do you really believe the rights of business owners to deny entry into a business based on race is more important than black American's right to be treated like human beings?



I disagree. I think their right to dignity and to be treated as equals is more important than the handyman's "right" to be a racist.
Click to expand...

We disagree, and this will only go in circles so I will make my final point on the subject. The founding fathers clearly state that to make a law that disregards the rights of any persons, is an unjust law, and is only a nation committing oppression.

All, too, will bear in mind this sacred principle, that though the will of the majority is in all cases to prevail, that will to be rightful must be reasonable; that the minority possess their equal rights, which equal law must protect, and to violate would be oppression.
Thomas Jefferson
Click to expand...

I've used this quote like ten times. Anyways, this is why I am stating the argument that although the ERA was absolutely fair, just, and deserved for the blacks and women, it in part violated the rights of private business.
 
Windsblow said:
It was about Centralizing Power and the destruction of Federalism ultimately resulting in the desired Reconstruction period and the dismantling of the Constitution.
Click to expand...

By centralizing power you of course mean the federal government imposing national policies making it more difficult and less profitable to use slave labor. Again, that's just a bs way of pretending it isn't all about slavery. That's no different than saying it's about states rights when you mean the rights for states to allow slavery.

Anymore questions?
Click to expand...

Yes. Can you cite specific actions unrelated to slavery that caused the civil war.
 
Windsblow said:
Lincoln was a pragmatist and whether or not he supported Slavery he did admit that the "negroid slave race" will never be equal in intrinsic quality to the WHite man.

Would you like me to find the quotes for you? It's pretty easy.
Click to expand...

He did that in an attempt to calm down the hysterical folks among him who thought he'd do something insane like give black folks equal rights.
 
Windsblow said:
There are many more....... So to claim Lincoln's 600,000 dead
Click to expand...

You mean the confederacy's 600k dead right? They left the united states before he even took office and then attacked the country. This type of idiocy is reminds me of the folks who attempt to blame Obama for starting the recession.
 
Dan Kone said:
You mean the confederacy's 600k dead right? They left the united states before he even took office and then attacked the country. This type of idiocy is reminds me of the folks who attempt to blame Obama for starting the recession.
Click to expand...

This is true. Seven states left before Lincoln took office.

Lincoln has been quoted saying that he believed slavery was wrong, but he didn't know how to go about getting rid of it. He had privately said a few times that he thought maybe they should make it illegal and offer (or force) the slaves to colonize Liberia and reimburse the slave owners. He also didn't want the civil war to happen, didn't believe America was ready for it, but he was kind of forced into it.

Abraham Lincoln said:
"If all earthly power were given me," said Lincoln in a speech delivered in Peoria, Illinois, on October 16, 1854, "I should not know what to do, as to the existing institution [of slavery]. My first impulse would be to free all the slaves, and send them to Liberia, to their own native land." After acknowledging that this plan's "sudden execution is impossible," he asked whether freed blacks should be made "politically and socially our equals?" "My own feelings will not admit of this," he said, "and [even] if mine would, we well know that those of the great mass of white people will not ... We can not, then, make them equals."5
Click to expand...
 
Dan Kone said:
You mean the confederacy's 600k dead right? They left the united states before he even took office and then attacked the country. This type of idiocy is reminds me of the folks who attempt to blame Obama for starting the recession.
Click to expand...

You intentionally miss the point and I don't know why. Under the Constitution the southern States, as well as all the rest, are Voluntarily part of the Union, Free to leave. They attempted to leave the Union and exercise the contract of Voluntary Federalism and the north mounted against them. Why would fort sumpter have all of those armaments if the North wasn't mounting a WAr? The point is Washington reneged on the compact that the southern States joined under. This was as much the North's War as it was the South's.

I am no pro Southerner and I believe that the south perpetrated some un human acts but that doesn't change the facts that Lincoln was a Tyrant and shredded the constitution.
 
sync0s said:
This is true. Seven states left before Lincoln took office.

Lincoln has been quoted saying that he believed slavery was wrong, but he didn't know how to go about getting rid of it. He had privately said a few times that he thought maybe they should make it illegal and offer (or force) the slaves to colonize Liberia and reimburse the slave owners. He also didn't want the civil war to happen, didn't believe America was ready for it, but he was kind of forced into it.
Click to expand...

I have never heard that Lincoln was part of that Liberian movement but it might be so. Those folk that were part of that were a group were, I believe if I remember this part of history correctly, protestant preachers that actually wanted to rid the country of blacks if they were to be free because they didn't want to have a freed black man running loose.
 
Dan Kone said:
And what Ron Paul doesn't seem to grasp about history is that this wasn't even an option because the south subverted our democracy by forming a new country and attacking us because they weren't happy with the results of a democratic election. Some how you guys are under the false impression that America could have somehow stopped the civil war from happening, but that's a complete falsehood.

This whole picture people like Ron Paul are trying to paint about the evil US government taking away states rights and behaving in a tyrannical nature to trample the rights of southerners is complete 100% bullshit.

This wasn't about states rights. This was about evil greedy slave owners trying to subvert democracy so they could continue to enslave a race of people. The south was wrong and the united states was right. It's that simple. All this revisionist civil war history is a pack of lies and it's shameful that everyone is so willing to defend the rights of slave owners. I can't believe this is even being discussed.



Yes. That's right. It was about slavery. None of that states rights bullshit. It's not a right to commit crimes against humanity by enslaving a race.
Click to expand...

So i scrolled back to find the Lincoln letter and saw this response. The last line especially.

Bwahahahahahahahahaha!!!!!!! Someone likes likes revised history i guess.
 
sync0s said:
We disagree, and this will only go in circles so I will make my final point on the subject. The founding fathers clearly state that to make a law that disregards the rights of any persons, is an unjust law, and is only a nation committing oppression.
Click to expand...

The constitution isn't perfect. This is a situation that doesn't account for. Either way someone's rights are being violated. You're balancing black folks rights to be equal against business owners right to oppress a race of people. IMO it's pretty easy to decide which is more important and I'd say the right to oppress a race of people is not a right at all.

I've used this quote like ten times. Anyways, this is why I am stating the argument that although the ERA was absolutely fair, just, and deserved for the blacks and women, it in part violated the rights of private business.
Click to expand...

I guess we just have different ideas of what rights are. I don't see the right to be oppressive as an essential liberty.
 
londonfog said:
what response are you seeking from Lincolns letters ????? I already commented about it
Click to expand...

me too. I guess that's inconvenient for them though. IMO those letters were just Lincoln being a politicians, saying what he needed to in order to calm down the folks upset from thinking he was going to give black folks equal rights. To say Lincoln was pro-slavery is a pretty funny version of history though. One of their better re-writes.
 
UncleBuck said:
if you weren't convinced previously that ron paul fucks turtles, take a gander at this:

[video=youtube;leYuJ4KkAuA]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=leYuJ4KkAuA[/video]

clearly, he has gained favor with the turtles by exchanging sexual favors with them.

just fucking sick.
Click to expand...




I think the turtles probably like Ron Paul because with Ron Paul we can start addressing the real damage we cause to the enviroment, We can legalize hemp and all start driving hemp cars and stop spilling oil :)

[video=youtube;4CP88CAzpTY]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4CP88CAzpTY&feature=mh_lolz&list=FLLYdzQj5Ugx8[/video]
 
deprave said:
I think the turtles probably like Ron Paul because with Ron Paul we can start addressing the real damage we cause to the enviroment, We can legalize hemp and all start driving hemp cars and stop spilling oil :)
Click to expand...

and we all get raises too! woo hoo!

i think that the turtles like ron paul because he has sex with them.

ron paul the turtle fucker.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top