The Truth About Ron Paul - Part 2

sync0s said:

So you don't think that scholarships are "movement of goods or money?" How about offering free legal services, isn't that "commercial trade?" Good god.

lol@the high school diploma. I've got a GED and am pursuing law, no need to get angry with personal insults, that is a prime example of what an unintelligent person would resort to in a debate

I already posted that I can't find that info as the info I'm getting from the owners is to vague. So I admit wrongfulness in it, because a statement without proof is a wrongful one. I won't go into further detail.

You have two quotes to pull: The RP libertarian 88 and the bush quote. Pull them, defame my character, and avoid the point behind my argument. I seriously don't know why I waste my time with you.

Click to expand...

scholarships are not goods and money..goods meaning as in bread,eggs,a bed to sleep in and I'm sure you know what money is...commercial trade is better understood when you break the two words down..trade is the sale of goods or merchandise to retailers, to industrial, commercial, institutional, or other professional business users...and commercial again is relating to commerce or public selling/buying with profit being chief aim...you really should know this if you are in marketing...so again NAACP does not sell there services for profit guy...

Good job getting your GED..did not know you did that... I just read that you did not finish high school..I think it is very important to have one or the other, so I was being serious when I said you need it..... did not say it out of anger, but you got a GED so what do I know..and I take Civil Rights serious and will refuse to let anyone spread misleading info about an organization that fights for it..so if you don't want it from me I suggest you at least know what you are talking about...

hazyintentions said:

...You know it makes since ...

Click to expand...

and you criticize me based on my spelling and grammar?

i don't capitalize intentionally.

you don't know the difference between "sense" and "since".



fucking amateur.

londonfog said:

Remember dude you are to ignore me and UB,,but somehow you keep coming back for more...Do you love me ??? and I was not talking about you and the link vs like ..someone actually did that to me and I had to ask did he mean link to make sure...I hate English and grammer..ar·kan·sas/ˈärkənˌsô/ and kan·sas/ˈkanzəs/...I mean really why to different saying for the word kansas...and what about I after E except after C or or when it sounds like A as in neighbor or weigh...well what about ancient, species, science, sufficient ..blows that rule to shit...nope I'm a math guy myself and I do love my chemistry

Click to expand...

Ohh yeah your my favorite.. Honestly you are at least sensible to talk to, I can understand your views to a degree.

UncleBuck said:

and you criticize me based on my spelling and grammar?

i don't capitalize intentionally.

you don't know the difference between "sense" and "since".



fucking amateur.

Click to expand...

Mehh I'll take a couple typos while defending my beliefs amidst a storm of senseless attacks..

UncleBuck said:

and you criticize me based on my spelling and grammar?

i don't capitalize intentionally.

you don't know the difference between "sense" and "since".



fucking amateur.

Click to expand...

how come I knew you would find something...lol...fucking english language...you must have been a proof-reader in your former life

hazyintentions said:

Mehh I'll take a couple typos while defending my beliefs amidst a storm of senseless attacks..

Click to expand...

"sense" vs "since" is not a typo. it is a misspelling of a word.

a very easy word.

a very, very fucking easy word.

you obviously do not know the difference.

junior college material all the way !

londonfog said:

scholarships are not goods and money..goods meaning as in bread,eggs,a bed to sleep in and I'm sure you know what money is...commercial trade is better understood when you break the two words down..trade is the sale of goods or merchandise to retailers, to industrial, commercial, institutional, or other professional business users...and commercial again is relating to commerce or public selling/buying with profit being chief aim...you really should know this if you are in marketing...so again NAACP does not sell there services for profit guy...

Good job getting your GED..did not know you did that... I just read that you did not finish high school..I think it is very important to have one or the other, so I was being serious when I said you need it..... did not say it out of anger, but you got a GED so what do I know..and I take Civil Rights serious and will refuse to let anyone spread misleading info about an organization that fights for it..so if you don't want it from me I suggest you at least know what you are talking about...

Click to expand...

I've already said that I support those groups, I'm not attacking them. I think whether you call it a club, private organization, or a private business, you should hold the right to operate your business under your own prerogative.

Scholarship is a movement of money, it's definition is "A grant or payment made to support a student's education, awarded on the basis of academic or other achievement." I'm sorry to break it to you. As for the NAACP, just refer to their tax form (2004): http://www.guidestar.org/FinDocuments/2004/131/084/2004-131084135-01d71275-9.pdf

88 At any time during the year, did the organization own a 50% or greater interest in a taxable corporation or partnership, or an entity disregarded as separate from the organization under Regulations section 301.7701-2 and 301.7701-3? CHECKED YES

Click to expand...

The organization owns public corporations (magazine companies and what not) that they (NAACP) gains revenue from.

For your earlier request UB:

NAACP tax form 990 said:

11a An organization that normally receives a substantial part of its support from a governmental unit or the general public. CHECKED

Click to expand...

Please, actually pay attention to the point I am trying to make and stop blaspheming me like I am anti racial support organizations.

What I find strangely ironic is how many on the left love to bash the right for enforcing morals, and then enforce their own - the example of course being the CRA's enforcement upon private entities. The CRA should have covered the government institutions only (city water fountains, public schools, public transportation, voting rights, etc.)

I'd like to hear someone in the left try to explain this to me... If the government should enforce morals (if your position is that racism is immoral and therefore should be banned), then which moral system should we adhere to when it comes to law, and then why shouldn't we ban recreational use of drugs if the majority deems it immoral? (to hit on a subject dear to us all) Then... which moral/ethical system should it enforce? Most of the nation derives its morals from religion, so which one do we pick? Christianity, Judaism, or Islam? That would probably lead to adultery, not worshiping, premarital sex, saying 'goddamn', and many other actions becoming a crime. Should it be whichever the majority chooses? Or should it just simply be majority rule on an issue by issue basis? That's closer to a real democracy - and if you're all in for that... raise your glass of hemlock and toast to the tyranny of the majority (if you don't get this reference, read about the demise of Socrates).

My answer (which is also the basis of Paul's position): Where the CRA went wrong was the blending of politics and morals, which are actually two different things. Ethics and morality enforcement is not a proper function of government. A proper government should only create laws to protect - not violate the rights of it's individual citizens. Among those rights are the right to life, liberty, and property - In short, that pretty much means you can do as you please as long as you do not violate any other individual's right to the same. If you want to expand the concept of rights to cover other things, so be it... as long as those 'new' rights do not violate the rights of aforementioned three. Here is how creating a new 'right' can do such a thing...

When a business is owner is forced to deal with a person he would otherwise choose not to do deal with - you have violated his right to property (by controlling his business) and his right to liberty (by removing his liberty to conduct his business as chooses). Because of this, a person has no 'right' not to be discriminated against by another individual.

A government however is different, as it is the only truly publicly owned entity. Each citizen is an equal 'shareholder' so to speak. As such it has no 'right' to discriminate, and must treat its citizen shareholders with equal consideration.

Address to Synco

well when you pass the bar go fight it in court..Scholarships are rewarded you can't buy or sell it..Scholarships awarded are tax free ( another clue).in order for something to be commerce you must have two parties..one selling /the other buying...NAACP does not participate in Interstate commerce ...They do not buy nor sell services for profit..They are a private organization open to all... now if you don't like the Civil Right acts laws, when you pass the bar go fight the law...for right now you are only speaking on opinion not law..Do you think you are the first to try this argument ????? If you want to start a private club/organization that only gives scholarships to who ever its your right to do so..not arguing that,

Title II of the Civil rights act states
Outlawed discrimination in hotels, motels, restaurants, theaters, and all other public accommodations engaged in interstate commerce; exempted private clubs without defining the term "private."

NAACP is considered a private club/organization
NAACP does not engaged in interstate commerce ( if they do please tell me what they buy or sell )

londonfog said:

Address to Synco

well when you pass the bar go fight it in court..Scholarships are rewarded you can't buy or sell it..Scholarships awarded are tax free ( another clue).in order for something to be commerce you must have two parties..one selling /the other buying...NAACP does not participate in Interstate commerce ...They do not buy nor sell services for profit..They are a private organization open to all... now if you don't like the Civil Right acts laws, when you pass the bar go fight the law...for right now you are only speaking on opinion not law..Do you think you are the first to try this argument ????? If you want to state a private club/organization that only gives scholarships to who ever its your right to do so..not arguing that, but if you are for profit ( commerce) then you can't

Title II of the Civil rights act states
Outlawed discrimination in hotels, motels, restaurants, theaters, and all other public accommodations engaged in interstate commerce; exempted private clubs without defining the term "private."

NAACP is considered a private club/organization
NAACP does not engaged in interstate commerce ( if they do please tell me what they buy or sell )

Click to expand...

You and UB keep stating the same thing. I know you can't legally. I am arguing that it is not right. Just because the government tells you it's wrong, doesn't make it wrong. I started this to demonstrate why RP has the view that you so disagree with (your question on page 229 or something).

txpete77 said:

I'd like to hear someone in the left try to explain this to me... If the government should enforce morals (if your position is that racism is immoral and therefore should be banned)...

Click to expand...

wow, way to miss the fucking point entirely.

i want civil rights enforced not (only) because i is the moral thing to do, but because it caused harm to those segregated and discriminated against.

your right to be a bigot ends when it harms others. period.

txpete77 said:

When a business is owner is forced to deal with a person he would otherwise choose not to do deal with - you have violated his right to property (by controlling his business) and his right to liberty (by removing his liberty to conduct his business as chooses).

Click to expand...

the guy that owns the gas station claims to be 'open to the public'.

if he refuses to sell gas to black people or jews or hispanics simply because they were born as such, they are causing harm to those people.

you want to open a private business that only interacts with members, be my guest.

you want to open a business that serves the general public, you must serve the general public, no matter what bunch of "inferiors" want to frequent it.

troublemakers and those disruptive to the business by choice, not by the way they were born, are the only ones you get to refuse service to.

UncleBuck said:

if he refuses to sell gas to black people or jews or hispanics simply because they were born as such, they are causing harm to those people

Click to expand...

Demonstrate the harm caused by the gas station owner, in terms of deprivation of life, liberty, or property...

hey guys just saw one of these signs I see everyday




are these people criminal? Are they hurting peoples feelings? Most of all why can't government protect us from this? I decided not to investigate because no one fucking cares and the government won't help us.

sync0s said:

You and UB keep stating the same thing. I know you can't legally. I am arguing that it is not right. Just because the government tells you it's wrong, doesn't make it wrong. I started this to demonstrate why RP has the view that you so disagree with (your question on page 229 or something).

Click to expand...

I had to step out my skin for a minute and view your point...Seeing you did not live in a time when NAACP was REALLY REALLY needed and times have change somewhat I can see why you don't understand the role they have played in assuring equal rights for all...my question now is how many white people have ever called the NAACP for help and was denied or how many white ( I'm sure you would have to be poor ) college students have applied for a scholaship and was turned down do to skin tone..hmmmmm now that is a question I can't answer myself but I will make a call monday and ask this question to see...

txpete77 said:

Demonstrate the harm caused by the gas station owner, in terms of deprivation of life, liberty, or property...

Click to expand...

they have to drive to the next station over, which may or may not serve them. or the next one. or the next one. just to get what others get without discrimination.

or, they get to pump their gas....for twice as much.

do some research. empirical evidence of these practices before the CRA abounds. to deny such is to be ignorant of the uglier history of america.

ever heard of this?



it stopped being published after the CRA was passed.

What did Mr Lender PRESIDENT OF THE NAACP HAVE TO SAY ABOUT RON PAUL ON THIS:




"Knowing Ron Paul's intent, I think he is trying to improve this country but I think also, when you talk about the Constitution and you constantly criticize the federal government versus state I think a lot of folks are going to misconstrue that....so I think it's very easy for folks who want to to take his position out of context and that's what I'm hearing," said Linder.

(Article continues below)




"Knowing Ron Paul and having talked to him, I think he's a very fair guy I just think that a lot of folks do not understand the Libertarian platform," he added.

Asked directly if Ron Paul was a racist, Linder responded "No I don't," adding that he had heard Ron Paul speak out about police repression of black communities and mandatory minimum sentences on many occasions.

Dr. Paul has also publicly praised Martin Luther King as his hero on many occasions spanning back 20 years.

"I've read Ron Paul's whole philosophy, I also understand what he's saying from a political standpoint and why people are attacking him," said Linder.

"If you scare the folks that have the money, they're going to attack you and they're going to take it out of context," he added.

"What he's saying is really really threatening the powers that be and that's what they fear," concluded the NAACP President.

Click here to listen to the MP3 interview.

deprave said:

hey guys just saw one of these signs I see everyday

are these people criminal? Are they hurting peoples feelings? Most of all why can't government protect us from this? I decided not to investigate because no one fucking cares and the government won't help us

Click to expand...

that sign is not the same as this sign....



do you not get the fucking difference?

one os for keeping out those who are disruptive to the business, the other is to keep people out based on factors beyond their control.

you fuckers dig your own grave on this issue. i can only hope ron paul gets the nomination and makes this a talking point.

if anti-miscegeny laws were still on the books, you guys would not even have to be bitching about how your rights are being taken away by some negro in the white house.

deprave said:

What did Mr Lender PRESIDENT OF THE NAACP HAVE TO SAY ABOUT RON PAUL ON THIS:




"Knowing Ron Paul's intent, I think he is trying to improve this country but I think also, when you talk about the Constitution and you constantly criticize the federal government versus state I think a lot of folks are going to misconstrue that....so I think it's very easy for folks who want to to take his position out of context and that's what I'm hearing," said Linder.

(Article continues below)




"Knowing Ron Paul and having talked to him, I think he's a very fair guy I just think that a lot of folks do not understand the Libertarian platform," he added.

Asked directly if Ron Paul was a racist, Linder responded "No I don't," adding that he had heard Ron Paul speak out about police repression of black communities and mandatory minimum sentences on many occasions.

Dr. Paul has also publicly praised Martin Luther King as his hero on many occasions spanning back 20 years.

"I've read Ron Paul's whole philosophy, I also understand what he's saying from a political standpoint and why people are attacking him," said Linder.

"If you scare the folks that have the money, they're going to attack you and they're going to take it out of context," he added.

"What he's saying is really really threatening the powers that be and that's what they fear," concluded the NAACP President.

Click here to listen to the MP3 interview.

Click to expand...

I understand that ...my problem is with the racist store owner who would take advantage of the change by not letting mexicans in his store

deprave said:

What did Mr Lender PRESIDENT OF THE NAACP HAVE TO SAY ABOUT RON PAUL ON THIS:




"Knowing Ron Paul's intent, I think he is trying to improve this country but I think also, when you talk about the Constitution and you constantly criticize the federal government versus state I think a lot of folks are going to misconstrue that....so I think it's very easy for folks who want to to take his position out of context and that's what I'm hearing," said Linder.

(Article continues below)




"Knowing Ron Paul and having talked to him, I think he's a very fair guy I just think that a lot of folks do not understand the Libertarian platform," he added.

Asked directly if Ron Paul was a racist, Linder responded "No I don't," adding that he had heard Ron Paul speak out about police repression of black communities and mandatory minimum sentences on many occasions.

Dr. Paul has also publicly praised Martin Luther King as his hero on many occasions spanning back 20 years.

"I've read Ron Paul's whole philosophy, I also understand what he's saying from a political standpoint and why people are attacking him," said Linder.

"If you scare the folks that have the money, they're going to attack you and they're going to take it out of context," he added.

"What he's saying is really really threatening the powers that be and that's what they fear," concluded the NAACP President.

Click here to listen to the MP3 interview.

Click to expand...

i've said before that i don't believe ron paul is a racist.

i do believe he penned a racist newsletter, as it was written i the first person.

but the newsletter can be explained without acquitting him as a racist because he has a constituency that eats that shit up.

immoral panderer to racists? sure. racist? probably not.

that said, paul's views on the CRA allow for racism to harm others. which is unacceptable to me.

fuck ron paul.

can anyone of you Ron Paul fan ask if he can come on RIU oneday so we can ask him some questions and have a debate...

londonfog said:

can anyone of you Ron Paul fan ask if he can come on RIU oneday so we can ask him some questions and have a debate...

Click to expand...

he would probably just keep saying "state rights" and "let's do some heroin!"

and then he would not realize the webcam was still on as he went on to fuck a turtle.