RE: Ron Paul "statist" on health care?

Brian:

I did indeed respond to all of your stuff, including a detailed response regarding Paul's position on sodomy laws (to which you never responded). If you're going to ignore my responses, that's your choice, but I'm not going to engage in circular and repetitive arguments with an individual who has no interest in my POV anyway.

Cheers,

Brian

Brian Miller wrote:

BH) You've never responded to my Sep 14 rebuttal of your charges against
Paul concerning DADT, free trade, immigration, federalism, and sodomy laws:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ca-liberty/message/5244. (BH

BM) I did indeed respond to all of your stuff, including a detailed response
regarding Paul's position on sodomy laws (to which you never responded).
(BM

Is there no statement so demonstrably wrong that you still won't brazenly
assert it? A search on
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ca-liberty/msearch?query=sodomy> "sodomy" in
ca-liberty reveals no such response. The thread tree for my message above
lists zero responses to it. The original thread
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ca-liberty/message/5060> three for that
discussion reveals no message from you to me to which I haven't
systematically responded. If your claim of having responded to my Sep 14
message isn't a hallucination, then you've hidden your response remarkably
well. Do you have a link to this mirage?

Other rebuttals of you by me that have gone unanswered are:

* on Saddam's death toll:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/lpsf-discuss/message/12907
* on the definition of "defense":
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cal-libs/message/2312
* on whether Iraq was invaded to find bin Laden:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/lpsf-discuss/message/12873
* on whether "defeat in Iraq was inevitable":
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ca-liberty/message/5214
* on whether Halliburton has fudged its books:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/lpsf-discuss/message/13130
* on whether the LRC "criticizes gay people, black people, women, etc.
as being 'insignificant'":
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/lpsf-discuss/message/13142
* on whether the Portland Platform allows a 100% marginal income tax:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/lpsf-discuss/message/13144
* on whether the Portland Platform allows "mandatory private sector
quotas": http://groups.yahoo.com/group/lpsf-discuss/message/12848
* on whether Giuliani ordered an arrest of a reporter that led to the
reporter being physically "beaten":
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/lpsf-discuss/message/13216 (a message to
which you explicitly said you decline to respond)
* on whether I'm supportive of the efforts of you and your team to
grow the LP: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cal-libs/message/2462

I know that Yahoo groups can occasionally not deliver a message due to
reasons like ISP bouncing, but you're simply delusional if you believe you
have "responded to all [my] stuff".

BM) If you're going to ignore my responses, that's your choice, but I'm not
going to engage in circular and repetitive arguments (BM

My Sep 14 message already diagnoses your argument by repetition, so it's too
late for that. In fact, your repetitive denials and hollow vouching seem to
be a deliberate attempt to bury my detailed fact- and quote- based
refutations under a steaming mound of tediousness. It's probably even
working, for some non-trivial fraction of our audience. Bravo.

BM) with an individual who has no interest in my POV anyway. (BM

My interest here is in training libertarians to respect facts and not treat
reality as optional, so as to preserve the credibility of our movement. The
extent to which your statements come in conflict with my agenda here is
entirely up to you.

As for lack of "interest in your POV", I guess it's been some other Brian
Holtz on the Platform Committee who has been seeking input here (Sep 16
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/lpsf-discuss/message/13177> and Sep
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/lpsf-discuss/message/13221> 19) on gay rights
Platform language.