Brian Miller wrote: BM) I'm not going to address Mr. Holtz's trolling in detail (BM
This thread started yesterday with Mark Slagle making a factually incorrect claim about whether a Chronicle article about Ron Paul contained the word "libertarian". In troll-like fashion, you chimed in eight minutes later with a citation-free attack on Paul while blithely assuming Slagle's claim was true. By contrast, my first posting corrected Slagle's claim by quoting the Chronicle article, and rebutted your attack on Paul by quoting him on national network TV using the label 'very libertarian' (without prompting) to describe his message. It's obvious which of us here is the troll, and which of us here is policing trolling with citation-based facts. BM) except to note that nowhere does Ron Paul actually refer to himself as a "libertarian" -- not even in the quotes Holtz posts. Nowhere does he say "I am a libertarian," (BM I haven't claimed he's used that phrase in his campaign for the GOP nomination. However, you've claimed he has "said he's not a libertarian". That's false. Quote Ron Paul saying (outside of the context of the LP) that he "is not a libertarian", and I'll donate $1000 to the LPCA in your name. BM) Not once has he said "I am a libertarian" -- rather, he has begrudgingly danced around the label when other people have pinned it on him. (BM In response to your trolling smear, I repeat the facts: in the only multi-minute interview I can find of Paul on national major-network TV, he without any prompting called his message "very libertarian": MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: You're running as a Republican this time. Why? REP. PAUL: Well, I was elected to Congress 10 times as a Republican. That's a pretty good reason. I've been able to deliver this constitutional, very libertarian message to my district and they like it and they reelect me. BM) I only tend to reply to messages that contain substantive insight (BM I'll concede that it long ago stop requiring any significant insight to document your serial distortions about Ron Paul. :-) You write on the Outright group: BM) Brian Holtz's perspectives on gay issues are as enlightening (and relevant) as my perspectives on how to pleasure a woman and raise children. (BM Five sentences later you say: BM) Libertarians understand that personal freedoms of LGBT people aren't "gay specific," but defense of the rights of all people. (BM So which is it? I don't need to be gay to correct your false claims about what Ron Paul has or has not said. Nor did I need to be gay to correct your claim that <http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/10/654.html> 10 U.S.C. ยง <http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/10/654.html> 654 <http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/10/654.html> (the Don't Ask Don't Tell law) automatically applies to anyone "caught in any gay event or venue". I just need to be a competent reader of English. BM) The policy issues, which truly matter, are well documented and irrefutable. (BM Please point us to the "documentation" for your untenable and unsubstantiated claims that * Ron Paul is "a homophobic bigot"; * Ron Paul "declares he isn't a libertarian"; * Ron Paul is "a statist on health care"; * Ron Paul "voted for continued government spending on education"; * Ron Paul "committed himself to pursuing increased government funding of abstinence education in the future"; * Ron Paul "supports some of the most odious versions of [border control] legislation"; * Ron Paul wants to "reduce the freedom of Americans to conduct business in Canada and Mexico"; * Ron Paul "believes that a centrally controlled federal government immigration policy that would have banned the migration of [my neighbor Intel CEO Andy Grove] is 'good for America'"; * Ron Paul "believes any enforcement of the Bill of Rights in favor of individual liberty (and not state control) is a 'violation of states' rights'" [emphasis added].
