Ron Paul For President in 2008

[Final-Fan]

"Deficit spending is tolerable under the rarest of conditions. It’s so rare that only once in the last century has deficit spending been justified."

I didn't say this. What I said is that the deficit levels of WWII were justified while the deficit levels of Reagan's presidency and those of Bush the Younger were/are not. Smaller deficits in Reagan's presidency were probably justifiable, and if the existence and criminal mismanagement of the occupation of Iraq is taken as a given then some deficits were probably unavoidable in this decade. But in both cases the deficits that actually occurred were blown far, far beyond any even remotely reasonable size.

Do you really think I'm laboring under the impression that my model is a perfect one? It is not and I never said it was. Far from it, in fact -- as I have actually pointed out on at least one occasion. But how much evidence do you really have that the model is biased very much against Republicans? What years does your statistic cover? Do you also want to account for the Republicans' superior party discipline (witness the 100% vote solidarity against Clinton's/Democrats' 1993 budget-balancing)? and the effect that had on budget decisions?

Whatever faults my arguments may have, you misrepresent them and my positions until the errors you point out are at best grotesque parodies of my own errors. I no longer wish to tolerate this.

I did exaggerate my feelings towards you when I spoke of "mutual enmity". I do apologize for that misrepresentation and any misunderstandings it produced. But I don't think that someone who stands in "utter contempt" of my positions, my arguments, my intelligence, and myself -- and who has been with me every step of the way of a series of arguments spanning untold thousands of words over a period of several days -- is in a position to tell me to "lighten up".

I do not anticipate responding to any reply of yours that does not contain something truly unexpected.