Re: Crazy Uncle Ron And His Skin-Head/Neo Nazi Supporters

Good Morning Constitutional Reset,

 

I don't know what all that is supposed to mean in your last missive,  you lost me there,  but I do know that Crazy Uncle Ron has broadcast in commercials in Iowa,  false, misleading and prevaricate information against his fellow Republican candidates.  Paul has broken the 11th Commandment,  "Never speak falsely (or badly)  against your fellow conservatives". 

 

Moreover,  Crazy Uncle Ron is naive when it comes to foreign policy.....This is not just a "Neo-Con"  belief, it is a conservative belief. 

 

As we have pointed out,   now that Crazy Uncle Ron is getting the media attention that his cult like followers so desired,  they are pissed when the spotlight is really shown on Crazy Uncle Ron's past record.

 

Tough.    If the shoe fits.......Wear it......

 

 

On Sat, Dec 24, 2011 at 3:54 AM, Constitutional.Reset <constitutional.reset@gmail.com> wrote:

On Dec 23, 8:14 pm, Coach <coachl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> The heat was put on by CNN in an interview about this newsletters, he
> walked out.  Very telltale of who the man is and how he reacts to
> adversity.

How so?  Who has the burden of carrying the charge and to what degree
of evidence?

Regarding accusations of 'isolationism' or 'racism' against Ron Paul:
1) For all those who would see Ron Paul stoned for any cause on motive
that Ron Paul is clearly neither neo-con nor neo-liberal I ask you to
take care for your soul's sake.
Both neo-cons and neo-liberals are statists who raise big government
as an idol to replace a big God they feel has abandoned and abused
them.

2) Those that have no problem with 'bearing false witness against
their neighbor', being children of the lie, have no problem playing
the role of the 'accuser' by hyperbole raised far beyond all
reasonable extrapolations of evidence that could reach
2.1)  the probable cause criteria
2.2)  and certainly very far from the wrongful intent that must be
proved so as to meet the beyond a reasonable doubt criteria
2.3)  were the evidence given hyperbolic extension is so ancient that
any civil or criminal misdemeanor complaints that could arise from
that evidence is decrepitly ancient  - so far beyond the time limits
established by statute that evidence witnessed is legally false at
least to the point of being inadmissible witness in justification for
ANY cause of action.

3) I will grant that blessing any candidate with your vote is a civil
issue –
but when an accusation upon Ron Paul is made to forestall that purpose
- and that accusation that goes so far as to impune malum per se
intent on a Ron Paul action which could only be misdemeanor at worst
and constructive good at best - the criteria for judgement in
assigning guilt MUST shift to both the  felonious  criteria and the
malum per se criteria of 'beyond a reasonable doubt'  - else by
slander (false witness) a person may make themself accomplice with
evidenced criminal intent much as Saul did with respect to the
martyring of St. Stephen and friends.


"If your law had not been my delight, I would have perished in my
affliction" - Psalm 119:92

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.