BO: "... he supports the repeal of the polling test restrictions too"

"Dude read your own post. I can't believe I have to quote you to get you to read your own babble. You said he supports the repeal of polling test restrictions. Which is another way of saying he against restrictions on polling; which is true. "

Dead: No dipshit it's another way of saying he is against restrictions on poll testing. AKA what the fuck I suggested we should have (a poll test). It is illegal to have poll tests in the USA, Ron Paul thinks it should be up to the states whether or not voters are required to take a basic poll test. When asked whether he personally thought polling tests could have a positive effect on our democratic system he said yes. I'll find the source later. God damn you're stupid.

Ron Paul is against this act: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voting_Rights_Act

You can see Ron's position of the VRA here: http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2011/05/14/166276/ron-paul-civil-rights-act/

God damn people like you only see and hear what you want. You're the reason this country squandered all of its blessings and opportunities.



If you are trying to say that Ron Paul is trying to create restrictions on voting you are completely wrong. Please show this proof of yours.

I don't know why I bother with your amateurish approach to facts and logic.

Suck my dick.

Lol because he voted against the "Voting Rights Act of 1965" you say he wants voting restrictions. Even though he said this himself:

"In 2006, Paul joined 32 other members of Congress in opposing the renewal of the 1965 Voting Rights Act, originally passed to remove barriers to voting participation for minorities.[258] Paul has indicated that he did not object to the voting rights clauses, but rather to restrictions placed on property rights by the bill.[259]" (wikipedia)

He even says it in your article. Are you too dense to read your own sources? He said he objected on property rights violations that were unconstitutional. He clearly states that he is not for a litmus test for voting.

Why do you openly distort other peoples views to fit your worldview? Is winning an argument that important that you must pretend that others are arguing for insane positions?

BO: "God damn people like you only see and hear what you want. You're the reason this country squandered all of its blessings and opportunities."

LMAO. You are a young inexperienced college student. You are in debt to the taxpayer. I'm a hard working business owner; supporting employees on a payroll; pay taxes; and have zero debt (other then a mortgage).

The difference between me and you is quite simple; when you see something wrong with the world, you expect someone to fix it / pay for it. I'm the one who fixes it / pays for it.

Btw; I'm waiting for your sources that show Ron Paul is for instating litmus tests on voting.

BO: "Suck my dick."

Please; why would lower myself to your level by responding. Good day.

hmmm, I did better than expected on that test, especially with all those tricky questions that only American citizens are supposed to know about.

OK first off, BO vs. dc has become THE most epic forum battle in KDice. Secondly, I thought this was funny:

Boner Oiler wrote
at 12:58 AM, Thursday June 23, 2011 CDT
Suck my dick.

From my iPhone

Ron Paul supports the repeal of the 14th amendment. Regardless of how fucking stupid you are to buy into the crazy side of Ron Paul I'm with him in that you should be able to have a litmus test for voters. Also can you admit you read my post wrong now and stop acting like a child?

lol @ BO thinking that dead is the only one acting like a child here.

imo, dead is acting like a 13 yr old, whereas BO is about.... 11ish.

this forum battle is not epic. it is fail. if i were a mod, i would honestly give them both a forum ban for awhile because they are polluting so many threads. id say their speech towards each other is closer to true hate speech than tilty racial slurs spouted by people who just finished a 40% luck game. whereas the latter is reactionary and in-the-moment, the former has a lot more thought and intention in it. sadly.

If we had polling tests democrats would never get elected.

am i reading this crap wrong or are they disagreeing on 2 statements that agree.

dc: Which is another way of saying he against restrictions on polling
BO: it's another way of saying he is against restrictions on poll testing.

anyway, get a room.

and lol thrax. anyone follow the robocalls the Republicans made in MD after the election last year? They robocalled the more 'democratic' (read black) voters to tell them that O'Malley (the Dem candidate) had won, that they didnt need to go vote and just stay home and watch the election results on tv.

@Monte,

Hate speech? Cmon Monte; where have I performed hate speech?

Forum pollution? Lol.

@Dasfury,

That's what I've been trying to explain this whole thread! BO's first post on the topic of Ron Paul; actually states he is against restrictions...

But what he is really trying to say; broken English aside; is that Ron Paul is FOR voting restrictions; which I believe is completely and utterly a lie.

He says he has this source that proves it correct; but he hasn't produced it yet. Still waiting...