The best candidate to challenge Barack Obama in 2012 is Ron Paul

No, but I saw the YouTube video. Nice RickRoll!

Why, the government passes a law that says poor people should get richer. And they do! That’s the way it has always worked! (Except in Olden Days, when the King would write an edict decreeing that the poor should not be as poor as they were, in which case the poor would get heaps of ducats and sovereigns to buy new thatch for their mud huts… but the American Revolution put an end to that economic system. Huzzah!)

The more poor people there are, the more money I make. I’m one of them limousine liberals. I like to make fun of poor people and call them stupid as I toss my empty Grey Poupon jars at them from out of my Bugatti, which runs on biofuel produced from human embryos.

nm

So not only can you not address the facts, let alone refute them, but you’d prefer to change the subject from how many of the FF’s owned slaves and refused to release them to how many said some things while still owning/buying/retaining slaves.
Go figure.

Just to clarify, the matter is not about what they said but what their actions were. If you say that slavery is bad while you’re buying slaves and/or refusing to release the ones you already have, it’s kinda clear what’s going on.

So your argument is that they are popular, therefore they can’t do wrong?

This is a great find. One of the principles of our Founding Fathers was to end slavery. This was at a time, in the 18th century, when the slave trade filled up the entire Atlantic ocean. Our Fathers bucked the trend and spoke for liberty.

No, that’s your argument.

My argument is that the Founding Fathers are popular men of wisdom. Ron Paul undertsands that. You don’t.

Well, Lincoln was very humane in putting down a rebellion so I figured you’d like him, too.

Quick, forward it along to the branch that’s being paid to post about the Founding Fathers!

Which they implemented by buying more slaves or prohibiting those who they already had from gaining freedom, all while not abolishing slavery by law. But, they really were totally against it.

New slogan-
“Ron Paul: the Founding Fathers didn’t buy that many slaves, vote for Ron!”

Then the Founding Fathers should run for president instead of Ron Paul - being both wise and popular, they’d win in a landslide!

Also some of them owned slaves, so owning slaves is a wise and popular thing to do.

Liberals are evil. That was established back on page 27 of the Constitution.

I wouldn’t expect the others here to understand. They’re just a bunch of globalists, collectivists and central bankers (I’m looking at you, Finn).

Why is it that I’m suddenly thirsty for beer? :confused:

“…vote for Ron, who didn’t make that many racist statements!”

“Ron Paul: George Washington supported ending slavery, except when he sent weapons to help keep the slaves in Haiti enslaved. Vote for Ron!”

“Ron Paul: George Washington signed the Fugitive Slave Act of 1793. Vote for Ron!”

“Ron Paul: George Washington signed the Naturalization Act of 1790, preventing freed blacks from becoming American citizens. Vote for Ron!”

I think you guys are really on to something here. Please convince Ron to use any of the above, you don’t even have to give me credit.
(P.S. Jack, I’m really not a Central Banker, I’m more of a Peripheral Banker. The Central Bankers’ job is to oppose Liberty, but my job is just to oppose America.)

Ron Paul understands that these were the acts of a popular and wise man. You don’t. (What’s wrong with you?)

See?

Lincoln killed 600,000 people.

Please tell me that Ron Paul understands that Lincoln inhumanely killed 600,000 people. Please tell me that’s his new slogan. Please.

The Naturalization Act of 1790 let Catholics and Jews become citizens, long before people in northern Europe had this priviledge. And it let protestants and Jews from southern Europe become citizens as well.

Nor did it prevent blacks from becoming citizens as you imply.

The Act let foreigners come here and work for only two years before they could become citizens. This was a great deal bacause in Europe you were a subject, not a citizen.

You simply have a negative view of the world. Whenever someone does something good that benefits people, you just snarl and nitpick.

Black people today have a much better standard of living than those today in Africa, thanks to the libertarian views of our Founding Fathers.

Ron Paul is already on record of being against the civil war. He says the slaves should have been freed prior to the civil war, unlike the Lincoln fans. He said it would have been cheaper to buy the slaves freedom rather than to fight a war over it. He said this on Meet the Press with Tim Russert. I take it you favor war over peacful negotiation.

No, it’s the view that hero-worship is irrational, regardless of who the object of it is.

Oh, absolutely! I like teh killing. War is awesome!

Also, all “Lincoln fans” really are glad that the slaves weren’t freed until the civil war. In fact, it depresses them that the slaves are freed now. Because everyone who likes Lincoln supports slavery. It’s true!

And if it was said on Meet the Press with Tim Russert, it must be true. Though clearly the south disagreed - they considered the price of freeing their slaves less than the cost of a war to prevent it.

It’s actually not that hero-worship is irrational - in moderate qualtities it’s perfectly fine. (In fact, it would be entirely rationaly for you all to worship me right now.) The thing that’s irrational is when you swerve into irrationality to defend your heroes. I can think that Washington was pretty cool despite having owned slaves; child of the times, fallible, all that. But when I start accusing reality of slandering him, that’s not cool; that’s kool-aid.

link

But the slaves were not of his kind, so it wasn’t nearly as bad as those African slave traders, right?