http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BFLd_...ature=youtu.be
Printable View
Holy shit
yea to bad all the paulites are slacktivists and won't vote.
3rd overall in Iowa with 1/5th of the total vote and 2nd overall in NH.
Those damn slacktivists....
keep in mind these caucuses and primaries are about delegates. Ron Paul is doing just fine and regularly blowing out the others in the 18-29 age bracket as well as independents.
http://a6.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphot...06930001_n.jpg
Ron Paul is the best out there right now, and his tie is pretty kick ass too
Paul Wrong. His ideas on bringing the troops home are great but he's a nut.
Anybody who is against the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is a racist pure and simple.
Why couldn't the jackass admit he was wrong?!
Black people and other minorities would still not be allowed to eat in restaurants
and other public places or it would have been years later. In 1952 or so blacks
were intergrated into the military. I'm sure Ron Paul would have been against that too.
Just imagine little black kids not allowed to swim in public swimming pools. Black
athletes not allowed to compete against whites etc. etc. Not allowed to stay
at the same motels and hotels as whites. There was
a famous black actress who put her toe in a swimming pool in Vegas one time. They
drained the pool and had black guys scrub it. Go figure. But it gets much much worse.
Black people who would get seriously injured in car accidents or whatever and then would
be refused treatment at white hospitals. And you have this a**hole Ron Paul against
the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to protect restaurant owners. All those Repub candidates
are fruitcakes and in many ways worse than Ron Paul, that I will admit but being
against the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is el colmo!
By the way I was against the war in Iraq from the start and protested against it.
Argued with my fellow grapplers over it too and was much critcized for it. I not
only want to bring the troops home I didn't want to send them there in the first place. I'm
former military myyself. I served 6 long years in the Army. I use to run with a rifle yelling kill kill kill!
Shot expert. Was a champion at the pogo sticks and all that. Fired 60mm machine gun, crawled
under bobwire with a machine live machine gun shooting over my head with a gas mask on and a
rifle in my hands and I'm not against war per se but against wars that are not neccesary and are
for profit like Iraq was.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 10th Planet Riverside, Ca
the civil rights act has done nothing but create even more segregation. jobs must meet a status quo of a certain racial composition because of it as opposed to skill. Read his arguements more carfully.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/0...n_1178688.html
the constitution already gave what benefits people from the civil rights act. The fact it had to be made in the first place was awful.
It is important to take what he says in context. I read what he said and I agree for the most part. He says over and over again he is against separation of races and isn't racist. I see it as he is searching for true constitution approved laws. And he states why it isn't a legal act. I agree to a point. I think it did more good than bad.
Read for yourself. http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul188.html
Is there something there I am missing that says because he is against it he is racist?
Just because I agree that KKK have the right to have hate parties in their own home doesn't mean I am racist. I don't think this makes him racist either, he could be, but I don't think his position on the issue does.
If he runs with Kucinich as an Independent he would have an easier time getting elected as most Americans don't agree 100% with Republicans or Democrats. He is trying to take as many people as he can from the Republicans but they all shun him and his values don't seem to fall in line with any of theirs, so I think he should break off. He doesn't talk like a racist, he might have said some things in the past but if you look at this guy today and what he talks about I don't feel their is any hidden agenda in his voice. Obama said all the right things too though and he is a very motivational speaker. I don't know about RP's stance on private property because if a giant multi billion dollar gas and oil company can afford to buy a giant area of land does that give them the right to exploit the resources that are on that property? As we see larger and larger areas of land being exploited and corrupted by these big oil companies, more water is becoming poisoned and more environment is being destroyed. At least Obama has stood with the environment and understands that there has to be some sort of regulation because when we are dealing with corporations that can harm the environment for other people and animals, the rights of every living thing should supersede those of a corporation. Ron Paul hasn't said enough about the environment for me, which should be the most important issue. Without clean air and water, it doesn't matter what you do with the fed.
if he breaks off he'll split the vote for republicans and obama will win
and the most important issue should be one's personal rights considering ad hoc and the bill of rights is now void.
This is moot, the front runner Romney is virtually the same as Obama. The left right paradigm is a distraction from the real issues. It's RP or nothing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Charlemange August K.
It's nice of you to take time off your cross to lecture us on why RP is a racist.Quote:
Originally Posted by 10th Planet Riverside, Ca
lolwut?Quote:
I not
only want to bring the troops home I didn't want to send them there in the first place. I'm
former military myyself. I served 6 long years in the Army. I use to run with a rifle yelling kill kill kill!
Shot expert. Was a champion at the pogo sticks and all that. Fired 60mm machine gun, crawled
under bobwire with a machine live machine gun shooting over my head with a gas mask on and a
rifle in my hands and I'm not against war per se but against wars that are not neccesary and are
for profit like Iraq was.
Fixed it for you Douglas. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by 10th Planet Riverside, Ca
[QUOTE=Douglas White;109308]T
It's nice of you to take time off your cross to lecture us on why RP is a racist.
Glad to help out when ever I can.
Thanks pal. I don't have the capability of an edit button.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jason Hyatt
Ron Paul Wants close all the U.S. military bases around the world! All 1,000 of them in 750 countries!
I got no problem with that. I'm not making any money off those bases but the 1% is and they are
the ones that rule the U.S.
So do you agree with Ron Paul about closing all our 1,000 foreign military bases around the world?
Go to YouTubePlay video
Dr. Paul says to bring the troops home. Close all the bases around the world. Filmed at a private VIP fundraiser in Orlando FL 10-21-2007
00:01:03
Added on 8/10/08
901 views
Ron Paul Wants close all the military bases! - YouTube
Dr. Paul says to bring the troops home. Close all the bases around the world. Filmed at a private VIP fundraiser in Orlando FL 10-21-2007
www.youtube.com/watch?v=ify0fcNYtj0 - Cached
Video.Play Video
Empire of Bases 2.0
It has 507 permanent bases! What is the U.S ... There are more than 1,000 U.S. military bases dotting the globe ... the American flag flies over 750 U.S. military ...
archive.truthout.org/empire-bases-2066691 - Cached
The Civil Rights Act did not improve race relations at the time, they forced business owners to render goods and services against their will (be they racist or not) to people they didn't want to serve. As well meaning as the law was, it increased racial tensions instead of helping to pacify them.Quote:
Originally Posted by 10th Planet Riverside, Ca
Freedom of speech, the preservation of personal liberty, and property rights all tie closely together. If you don't want a certain type of people coming on to your property for whatever reason you like, you reserve the right to ask them to leave or get arrested for trespassing. the Civil Rights Act stripped business owners of their rights to refuse services to whomever they did not wish to serve. It doesn't matter if they are racists or not. If the community had a problem with a racist business owner, they simply organize a boycott and watch the business crumble.
Making laws for or against a certain group of people is racist in nature. The federal government should not get involved in these matters. Just like hate crime laws are racist and redundant. They just punish someone more for assuming because they aren't the same race, the criminal deserves more than the normal punishment.
You seem to be getting pretty worked up about something you clearly have limited knowledge about. The constitution grants the rights of all Americans. Ron Paul recognizes that. He is also no racist. He is against the failed war on drugs and regularly denounces the fact that the war on drugs targets blacks and minorities the most. Blacks and minorities are prosecuted at much higher rates than whites. Racists wouldn't point that out. Here are some other links proving he is no racist.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZkpTYMmppgA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OGhv3paNz6U
"Racism is a collectivist ideology, Ron Paul HATES collectivism. He believes in individualism, which is incompatible with racism."
Coolins335
"I served 6 long years in the Army. I use to run with a rifle yelling kill kill kill!
Shot expert. Was a champion at the pogo sticks and all that. Fired 60mm machine gun, crawled
under bobwire with a machine live machine gun shooting over my head with a gas mask on and a
rifle in my hands"
Running with your rifles yelling kill kill kill is programming for war. I did it in the Marine Corps also. Shooting expert in the Army is no astonishing feat. Trying to hit 36 of 40 man sized pop up targets from 50m to 300M is not a challenge. I never saw pugil sticks after boot camp and don't know what you mean by "and all that." I'm not saying a 60MM machine gun doesn't exist, but in two tours to Afghanistan conducting engineer security, I never saw them. I also know that mortars can be 60MM and that would be one mighty beast of a gun that wouldn't be easily mobile. After a google search, I still cant seem to find anything. Perhaps you meant the 40mm Mk 19 Grenade Launcher? That is a crew served weapons system that I am very familiar with. The barbed wire fence thing is fine and dandy but you are in no danger. I did it in Army Basic in Ft Sill back in 2002 and again during USMC Basic in Parris Island in early 08.
Sounds to me like you never went anywhere worth talking about. It's cool if you served but didn't deploy to a combat zone, but don't pretend things you did in basic training amount to anything legitimate.
I am totally down with closing all foreign bases. It would save billions of dollars and they would spend their money at home instead of foreign countries helping our economy. A military presence around the world does little for national security. Is Switzerland, Sweden, or Canada all over the world? Are they less safe than America because they don't have hundreds of military bases in other countries?
http://campaigniran.files.wordpress....7/usbases1.jpg
Whom is agitating whom again? If I were the Iranians, Id sure as shit want to get nukes too.
schoolQuote:
Originally Posted by jason_c
60mm machine guns? Holy shit! lol Maybe he's talking about 60mm mortars?
M60 7.62mm Machine Gun - GlobalSecurity.org - Reliable ...
The M60 is a gas-operated, air-cooled, belt-fed, automatic machine gun that fires from the open-bolt position. It has a maximum rate of fire of 550 rounds per minute.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita...ound/m60mg.htm - Cached
Are there any black people on this forum for Ron Paul and against the Civil Rights Act of 1964?
I don't think so.
60mm is just a tad bigger than 7.62mm... and M60 doesn't mean it's 60mm. lol
ok the M60 gotcha. that's the one Rambo ran around with and the 20 rounds he had on the belt killed a battalions worth of guys. That indeed shoots the 7.62 Nato not any colossal 60mm. We used the 240 Golf and Bravo. never did get my hands on an m60...
Yeah I've never seen one either. I think I know why.
"The M60 continues to be used in the 21st century by U.S. Navy SEALs and as a door gun on U.S. Army helicopters, and was the main 7.62 mm machine gun by some U.S. special operations forces to the late 1990s. As of 2005, it is used by the Coast Guard, Navy, and a some reserve units, though it is being phased out in favor of the M240 7.62 mm medium machine gun. Its use as an Army helicopter door gun will soon taper off, as an improved M240 version has been adopted for this role."
The reason the SEALS are still using the 60 over the 240 is because some of the newer versions of the M60 are lighter weight than the 240, maybe?
Was talking to a Viet Nam vet the other day. He said the M14 rifle was much
better than the M16. He said he kept his M14 rifle when he went to Viet Nam
because the newer lighter weight M16 would jam a lot if it got wet/muddy while
the M14 would not jam. Sometimes new is not better.
I believe the military dumped the M14 as the standard battle rifle because of weight and mag capacity. The biggest influence over what kind of rifles we get depends on what type of ammo it shoots. Notice many of the NATO nations service rifles fire the 5.56 and all accept the m16 magazines. At least that is what I noticed while serving overseas with other nations, British, Estonian, French, and a slew of other flags I didn't recognize all had 5.56 weapons.
I remember watching powerpoint presentations saying that we were not allowed to use hollow points or modify our ammo because it would cause unnecessary suffering. I wanted to know how our leaders justified using the 5.56 round which is barely good enough to take down small game but we expected the round to kill men. So in training we were fed bullshit lines like, the round tumbles or maiming one is better than killing him because instead of one man dying on the battlefield, it now takes 2 men to carry him and his gear so shooting and maiming one man took 3 out of the fight. I also noticed that people were bitches shooting an over powdered .22 round at stationary paper targets, how would they fare shooting a larger caliber rifle in combat? I personally think we should have the option to use something with More stopping power like a 7.62 rifle if we have proven that we can handle the 5.56 on the range and during close quarters combat training.
So Jason, you're are ex-military too? Do you use the Veteran's hospital? My cousin is ex-Marine andQuote:
Originally Posted by Jason_C
goes to the Veteran's hospital. I applied but they said I make too much money. The lady
told me to apply again saying I have trouble with my hearing. I might apply again sometime
in the future. Have been to the local Veteran's hospital many times with my cousin. They
have a PX type store where you don't have to pay taxes on the goods. You don't have to
be ex-military or military at all to buy there. Seems just most people don't know about it.
It's like a small Target store with clothes, electronics and some food. Plus they have a
cafeteria.
M16 Rifle - The Vietnam War
... but the rifle was plagued by jamming problems ... The redesigned rifle was named as the M16A1 and was shipped to Vietnam ... Weight of the M16 rifle with ...
www.vietnamgear.com/kit.aspx?kit=548 - Cached
I haven't gone to any hospitals since separation. I'm waiting for a few things to happen so I can move to NH then perhaps I will enroll in veterans services up there. It is shitty that you are getting the run around from the VA hospital. I believe anyone who has the nards to serve his country and is discharged honorably, they should be privy to some drastically discounted health care coverage and other such benefits of the sort.