The Truth About Ron Paul - Part 2

[UncleBuck]

Opinion, but rhetoric imo.

of course it is just opinion to you.

you will not accept actual interviews with actual newspapers where he actually defended the racism within the ron paul newsletter. ron paul could tell you himself and you would call it opinion.

what can not be disputed is that he would have let us crash in 2008.

what can not be disputed is that he does not trust my wife to make decision about her own body and her own health.

this man is not for liberty, he is not for equal rights.

there is no disputing that based on his own words and actions.

 

[UncleBuck]

Not only that, but he wants to bring back slavery, bring back the continental, revoke women's right to vote, re-institute prohibition, is in favor of mass corporal punishment, believes the KKK should have a representative in every K-12 classroom, wants to actually see your wife's vaginer and doesn't wash his hands after using the lavatory.

he also killed a guy once in laredo.

 

[UncleBuck]

That video is straight propaganda. Not because it's wrong, but it took some of RP's stances and portrayed them as being totally wrong. For instance his stance 1964 civil rights act was portrayed as making him a bad person

how dare the federal government step in and tell local businesses that they can't bar blacks while advertising themselves as 'open to the public'.

how dare they enforce equal rights for all.

what a fucking travesty.

 

[NoDrama]

he also killed a guy once in laredo.

In a Mexican Standoff no less. Who do you know that actually shoots in that situation? The Guys a hot head for sure, probably a philanderer as well, you know those libertarian types.

 

[sync0s]

how dare the federal government step in and tell local businesses that they can't bar blacks while advertising themselves as 'open to the public'.

how dare they enforce equal rights for all.

what a fucking travesty.

You truly are ignorant, aren't you?

You go ahead and quote the part of my post saying he is portrayed as a bad person, than turn around and continue it as your defense. I never said that you had to agree with his opinion. In America, you should never have to agree with someones opinion, but an opinion does not necessarily make one a bad person for it.

He is absolutely right about the standard of our government forcing people to continue to see color. If you are forced to hire a percentage of a race, you are forced to see the color of the race. Ask you self also, is it equal rights for all if a business has to hire a percentage of one particular race at the expense of another?

 

[UncleBuck]

In a Mexican Standoff no less. Who do you know that actually shoots in that situation? The Guys a hot head for sure, probably a philanderer as well, you know those libertarian types.

yeah, that was crazy.

i bet his balls are a mighty heavy thing to drag around, what being made of brass and iron and all.

 

[NoDrama]

how dare the federal government step in and tell local businesses that they can't bar blacks while advertising themselves as 'open to the public'.

how dare they enforce equal rights for all.

what a fucking travesty.

If it were really equal rights for all, then what is affirmative action? Why do we allow a certain minority in this country a 100% welfare driven lifestyle as long as they live on a certain patch of dirt? Equal rights?

 

[NoDrama]

yeah, that was crazy.

i bet his balls are a mighty heavy thing to drag around, what being made of brass and iron and all.

I heard they were Rhodium Plated.

 

[sync0s]

If it were really equal rights for all, then what is affirmative action? Why do we allow a certain minority in this country a 100% welfare driven lifestyle as long as they live on a certain patch of dirt? Equal rights?

Nice job reinforcing a racist argument. Moron....

 

[NoDrama]

You truly are ignorant, aren't you?

If UB were ignorant of a subject he would not comment at all, I assure you.

 

[NoDrama]

Nice job reinforcing a racist argument. Moron....

ummm, what? I don't quite understand. What point was i trying to make there?

 

[UncleBuck]

You truly are ignorant, aren't you?

You go ahead and quote the part of my post saying he is portrayed as a bad person, than turn around and continue it as your defense. I never said that you had to agree with his opinion. In America, you should never have to agree with someones opinion, but an opinion does not necessarily make one a bad person for it.

He is absolutely right about the standard of our government forcing people to continue to see color. If you are forced to hire a percentage of a race, you are forced to see the color of the race. Ask you self also, is it equal rights if a business has to hire a percentage of one particular race at the expense of another?

you have absolutely no idea what affirmative action is, do you?

affirmative action is not about forcing someone to hire a certain percentage of one race or the other. affirmative action prevents not hiring one race or another.

suppose 1,000 people show up to interview, 200 of them are black and 800 of them are white. suppose you hire 100 people. affirmative action says you should hire around 20 black and 80 white, in proportion with how many interviewed. you don't get raped by gorillas if you hire 19 blacks and 81 whites, you know.

empirical evidence points to the fact that such laws are needed. history is in my corner.

 

[NoDrama]

you have absolutely no idea what affirmative action is, do you?

affirmative action is not about forcing someone to hire a certain percentage of one race or the other. affirmative action prevents not hiring one race or another.

suppose 1,000 people show up to interview, 200 of them are black and 800 of them are white. suppose you hire 100 people. affirmative action says you should hire around 20 black and 80 white, in proportion with how many interviewed. you don't get raped by gorillas if you hire 19 blacks and 81 whites, you know.

empirical evidence points to the fact that such laws are needed. history is in my corner.

You need 100 new employees. Ok so you have 800 white guys show up, 200 black guys show up. out of the 800 white guys who showed up, only 1 of them truly qualifies for the job, out of the 200 black guys ,100 of them qualify. The company hires 100 black guys and leaves the one white guy jobless. Know why?

 

[UncleBuck]

You need 100 new employees. Ok so you have 800 white guys show up, 200 black guys show up. out of the 800 white guys who showed up, only 1 of them truly qualifies for the job, out of the 200 black guys ,100 of them qualify. The company hires 100 black guys and leaves the one white guy jobless. Know why?

would it be insensitive to suggest a propensity for spinning rims and watermelons?

 

[UncleBuck]

I heard they were Rhodium Plated.

one time, for no reason whatsoever, ron paul chose to ride me like a horse through the foothills of montana during a six-week stretch.

i sobbed like a baby, questioned my manhood, and at times considered if life was worth continuing. but i added 25% leg strength.

the man is a god.

 

[NoDrama]

would it be insensitive to suggest a propensity for spinning rims and watermelons?

Not if those rims are like Ron Pauls balls (That fucking rhymes), Rhodium Plated, oh yeah baby.

 

[sync0s]

you have absolutely no idea what affirmative action is, do you?

affirmative action is not about forcing someone to hire a certain percentage of one race or the other. affirmative action prevents not hiring one race or another.

suppose 1,000 people show up to interview, 200 of them are black and 800 of them are white. suppose you hire 100 people. affirmative action says you should hire around 20 black and 80 white, in proportion with how many interviewed. you don't get raped by gorillas if you hire 19 blacks and 81 whites, you know.

empirical evidence points to the fact that such laws are needed. history is in my corner.

Some states such as California (California Civil Rights Initiative) and Michigan (Michigan Civil Rights Initiative) have passed constitutional amendments banning affirmative action within their respective states.

Don't see them having many problems... Please site this empirical evidence.

 

[sync0s]

ummm, what? I don't quite understand. What point was i trying to make there?

Your assumption of minorities and welfare.

 

[NoDrama]

You ever wonder why the Framers put certain things in the Constitution like they did? Like the part about No state SHALL make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts. Ever look up the legal definition of shall? Shall means mandatory imperative command. ie it will be done. So if the Federal Reserve note is legal tender in payments in all 50 states, aren't all the states in violation of the Constitution? Don't you need an amendment to invalidate parts of the Constitution? Where is the one that relieves states of their legally binding mandate? Only 1 state is in half compliance as of this date, Utah, they allow gold and silver as payments and do not charge any kind of capitol gains upon them (Federal still does), but they still allow FRNs too.

 

[UncleBuck]

Don't see them having many problems... Please site this empirical evidence.

the empirical evidence is historical data.

you can even observe samples of businesses that had no problem opening their doors every day with a "no blacks" sign on the window.

and i am all for state's rights as well. if california and michigan decided AA was not for them or not needed, so be it.