And since my tagline openly states that I am an anti-libertarian, the most rational assumption is that your statement was intended to suggest that being a "newbie" somehow has something to do with being anti-libertarian. How you figure this, however, I'm not too sure.
The most rational thinking is that I stated two facts -- newbie and anti-libertarian. Whatever assumption you made was of your choosing. Did you know that most everyone is biased?
In short, however, I think what is going on here is that you either didn't understand what I originally wrote, or didn't bother to read it fully and/or closely.
I know that a person can't be anywhere near as oppressive as a government. To say, or worse, actually believe, that the two can be just as oppressive as the other is irrational. It simply isn't true. Not by a million miles.
Instead, you saw the "anti-libertarian" in my tagline, got your knickers into a knot about it, and flew off into a pre-programmed libertarian rant.
Nope. I didn't read your tagline until after my first post to you. Hey, you want to wear a chip on your shoulder that's your business. You came out swinging in your opening 4 post.
Only one of which turned out to actually be correct.
Whatever assumption you made was of your choosing.
Tell you what, instead of anybody having to "make assumptions", why don't you just explain what exactly you meant by the comment, and how it differs from the way in which I took it?
Did you know that most everyone is biased?
Yes I did, which is why I find myself wondering why you got such a head of steam up about the fact that I have a certain bias in my politics.
Nope. I didn't read your tagline until after my first post to you. Hey, you want to wear a chip on your shoulder that's your business. You came out swinging in your opening 4 post.
Were you in the audio-visual club in high school? 'Cause you sure are good at projection!