Ron Paul 2012

C

Carthoris

Well-Known Member
londonfog said:
Funny wow people try to change history:wall:...but I guess it is Hi(s)story .....The compromise on the 3/5 rule came about due to delegates against slavery generally wished to count only the free inhabitants of each state. Delegates supportive of slavery, on the other hand, generally wanted to count slaves in actual numbers. Since slaves could not vote:cry:, slaveholders:cuss: would thus have the benefit of increased representation in the House and the Electoral College:roll:...those tricky damn southerners:dunce:....
Click to expand...
The 3/5ths rule was negotiated twice. Once during the Articles and once during the Convention. The first time the North wanted to count the slaves so they could tax the South more heavily. The second time the North didn't want to count the slaves as people because it would increase the power of the South. So basically the North and the South didn't care about the slaves at all except in how much power they could get from their use. Once again: The North only supported the counting slaves as people to gain power over the South, as soon as they stood to lose anything they dropped the slaves being people issue like it was a bee hive.

I swear, next you will be saying the civil war was over slavery.

It was obvious when you brought the 3/5th rule up that you didn't know much about it, and it is still obvious. Let me refresh your memory:

that lincoln character was poisoned and evil, then. fucking asshole.

lyndon johnson? poisoned and evil. pure fucking asshole, that guy.

founding fathers? poisoned and evil bunch of mother fucking assholes with their 3/5th rule.

george w bush? didn't i see him talk about the achievement gap? that stupid, evil, poisoned asshole.

fuck all of them and anyone else who had been unable to talk politics without the avoiding the inevitable: the necessarily intertwined relationship of race and politics.

welcome to the real world. you'll find that it differs greatly than the ideological fantasy ayn rand land in which you have been residing.

you know, the fantasy land where child labor is okey dokey and race should never come into politics.

fucking rube.
Click to expand...
 
C

Carthoris

Well-Known Member
Windsblow said:
Though you are right about the purpose of the 3/5 rule I disagree with the idea that there was not a difference between the North and the South. Why were the North and South fighting for power. Slavery was a bone of contention from the beginning and the Founders looked the other way and hope to settle it when the Brits weren't waiting to strike and destroy a infant country.

To clarify. I am not stating a pro north or south position. I think there were both wrong in many ways Lincoln was a Tyrant that destroyed the country and the south was archaic bunch slave owners. Slavery would had went away without any of the Wars and legislation. The NOrth Just made things worse and the money and power was rooted in slavery down south.
Click to expand...
The slavery issue wasn't really a major cause of the war. Why do I say that? Slavery was still legal at the beginning of the war. In fact the Emancipation Proclamation only outlawed slavery in states that didn't rejoin the Union by 1863. In case you don't remember, the secession started in 1860. If the south hadn't of seceded, or had rejoined the Union, slavery would of continued to exist for decades in the south. Probably into the 1900s. The Emancipation Proclamation was a war time executive order - it could not of happened without the civil war. Also, the South had enough votes to keep the North from outlawing slavery. The 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments would not of passed for many years if the war had never started. They were passed without Senators or Representatives from half the country present(the South)

So, the next question is: If the institution of slavery wasn't in any immediate danger of being outlawed prior to the war - why did the South secede?

Our nation started as a loose alliance of states with strong state governments and a weak federal one. This was via the Articles of Confederation. Then the Constitutional Convention came along and gave the federal government more power. There was nothing saying the states had to stay part of the USA. Remember, any power that is not strictly given to the federal government is reserved for the state. Many states disagreed with more power being given to the fed gov and they started moving towards secession as soon as the country was founded. The states believed they had the right to secede, and they were correct under the 10th Amendment.

All the other issues, including slavery, fell under this umbrella of state rights vs federal rights.
 
JohnTheFarmer

JohnTheFarmer

Member
Carthoris is 99% correct. The only point, which is minor, I would dispute, is slavery would have died out in the south with the inevitable rise of the industrial revolution which would have seen the "peculiar institution" die out of its own obselecense around the 1880's-1890's.

I never could quite concieve how a "free country" could really be free when it was held together by the barrell of a gun and the point of a sword...We ceased to become a Union of soviergn states and began the American Empire with what Lincoln did by raising an army to invade his own country.

When one enteres willingly into the social contract, they have the natural right to withdraw from it when the government which is agreed upon becomes tyrannical and oppressive. Same reason taxes used to be voluntary- it is not freedom when one is forced to part with thier property, just as it is not freedom when a state and its people are forced to be part of a government in which they do not consent.

Ever read any Lysander Spooner?

+ rep for knowing your history Carthoris.
 
deprave

deprave

New Member
Ron Paul's Personal Update - About the Milk Raids

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

Ron Paul: Americas Last Hope


[video=youtube;biROvkvgc20]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=biROvkvgc20[/video]

Ron Paul 2012: : Liberty: America's Last Hope by David Unger


[video=youtube;lruzNKyd8IQ]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lruzNKyd8IQ[/video]


Ron Paul 2012: Political Rocky Balboa


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

Windsblow

Well-Known Member
JohnTheFarmer said:
Carthoris is 99% correct. The only point, which is minor, I would dispute, is slavery would have died out in the south with the inevitable rise of the industrial revolution which would have seen the "peculiar institution" die out of its own obselecense around the 1880's-1890's.

I never could quite concieve how a "free country" could really be free when it was held together by the barrell of a gun and the point of a sword...We ceased to become a Union of soviergn states and began the American Empire with what Lincoln did by raising an army to invade his own country.



When one enteres willingly into the social contract, they have the natural right to withdraw from it when the government which is agreed upon becomes tyrannical and oppressive. Same reason taxes used to be voluntary- it is not freedom when one is forced to part with thier property, just as it is not freedom when a state and its people are forced to be part of a government in which they do not consent.

Ever read any Lysander Spooner?
Click to expand...
+rep for actually knowing some factual historic information
 
Windsblow

Windsblow

Well-Known Member
Carthoris said:
The slavery issue wasn't really a major cause of the war. Why do I say that? Slavery was still legal at the beginning of the war. In fact the Emancipation Proclamation only outlawed slavery in states that didn't rejoin the Union by 1863. In case you don't remember, the secession started in 1860. If the south hadn't of seceded, or had rejoined the Union, slavery would of continued to exist for decades in the south. Probably into the 1900s. The Emancipation Proclamation was a war time executive order - it could not of happened without the civil war. Also, the South had enough votes to keep the North from outlawing slavery. The 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments would not of passed for many years if the war had never started. They were passed without Senators or Representatives from half the country present(the South)

So, the next question is: If the institution of slavery wasn't in any immediate danger of being outlawed prior to the war - why did the South secede?

Our nation started as a loose alliance of states with strong state governments and a weak federal one. This was via the Articles of Confederation. Then the Constitutional Convention came along and gave the federal government more power. There was nothing saying the states had to stay part of the USA. Remember, any power that is not strictly given to the federal government is reserved for the state. Many states disagreed with more power being given to the fed gov and they started moving towards secession as soon as the country was founded. The states believed they had the right to secede, and they were correct under the 10th Amendment.

All the other issues, including slavery, fell under this umbrella of state rights vs federal rights.
Click to expand...
Why waste your time explaining the complicated American past to LondonFog. He doesn't care about facts or history. He only cares about feelings, Statist mysticism and the rule of Man. Some people just don't want to understand the truth. They want to try and create it. Which is also quite impossible.
 
OregonMeds

OregonMeds

Well-Known Member
londonfog said:
ROFL so says the Brand New Person with 4 post.....Damn did you change your name to do that..LOL too funny so funny its stupid
Click to expand...
He knows a whole lot more about the subject than you obviously, and is right, so it really makes you look pretty dumb trying to make fun of someone over such a great and well thought out response. Why can't people act like adults any more and talk and debate intelligently without resorting to chest pounding and swinging verbal clubs at eachother?

You just made yourself look the fool, even if what you said previously were true which I didn't bother to look at after seeing this, and I doubt given the lack of intellect and common courtesy you are showing at the moment. It's like you're 10 years old. Grow up.
 
C

Carthoris

Well-Known Member
JohnTheFarmer said:
Carthoris is 99% correct. The only point, which is minor, I would dispute, is slavery would have died out in the south with the inevitable rise of the industrial revolution which would have seen the "peculiar institution" die out of its own obselecense around the 1880's-1890's.

I never could quite concieve how a "free country" could really be free when it was held together by the barrell of a gun and the point of a sword...We ceased to become a Union of soviergn states and began the American Empire with what Lincoln did by raising an army to invade his own country.

When one enteres willingly into the social contract, they have the natural right to withdraw from it when the government which is agreed upon becomes tyrannical and oppressive. Same reason taxes used to be voluntary- it is not freedom when one is forced to part with thier property, just as it is not freedom when a state and its people are forced to be part of a government in which they do not consent.

Ever read any Lysander Spooner?

+ rep for knowing your history Carthoris.
Click to expand...
Thanks, and welcome to the forums:)
 
C

Carthoris

Well-Known Member
londonfog said:
ROFL so says the Brand New Person with 4 post.....Damn did you change your name to do that..LOL too funny so funny its stupid
Click to expand...
Having 4 posts on a weed forum has very little to do with knowing history. I'm sure there are lots of college professors who teach history who have never posted on this forum. In fact, Id guess most of them haven't. What I said was correct. If you can't accept that, then it's your problem.
 
deprave

deprave

New Member
NEW PRO RON PAUL CAFERTY FILE

CNN

"A Race Between President Obama & Anyone Other Than Ron Paul Would Be Like Watching Grass Grow"


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




 
deprave

deprave

New Member
Thanks Zazahlze, I already posted that vid 5 or 6 pages ago or maybe less, I have been update with every ron paul video on the web each day no discrimination but I try to avoid amatuer edited/produced, I don't beleive I have missed one in the last week or so but dont know how long I can keep this up. Only really takes me about 15 minutes though as it goes right to my phone instantly, just gotta sort thru the crap cause there is 100's a day uploaded with the word Ron Paul associated. If you can hit the other forums your with as I have been getting all of mine, it could make some people open their eyes.

Just getting videos and info about ron paul out on websites causes more people to see the video or read the text.
 
zazahzle

zazahzle

Active Member
hahahaha my bad bro.. bongsmilie :wall:


yeah man he's gettin a pretty good buzz goin around, and it's still early.. Young people love him, and know how to network.. This is America's last chance for this guy, and I hope people will be willing to see what a "REAL CHANGE" is all about. I know some people disagree with some of his issues, but in the "big picture" topics, he is so precise with what should happen, and solutions for problems. I think a lot of people could agree on that..
 
deprave

deprave

New Member
its all good man, if u want to post some older vids here it won't be a duplicate, I am only posting the new ones each day over the past week now. I am sure I miss a lot also so be on the lookout - thanks mang
 
deprave

deprave

New Member
Ron Paul Is Changing The Republican Party




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



 
deprave

deprave

New Member
Ron Paul Talks about his Spiritual side
Old Video
[video=youtube;4UVxkFAHQSo]http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=4UVxkFAHQSo[/video]
 
deprave

deprave

New Member
Pat Buchanan on IMF Sex Scandal: Ron Paul Is On Top Of This... Bad Day For New World Order



[video=youtube;sDVpWmmSHVE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sDVpWmmSHVE[/video]
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top