You're being intellectually dishonest here. You know damn well those are not the things that make him a liberty candidate. You also know that the reason we support him is not for those things. It's because we want to see liberty actually happen in the real world, not just as a theoretical fantasy ideal of someone who will never do anything wrong. Regardless of whether or not you agree with that notion, you are demonstrating willful ignorance when you suggest that those are the reasons we consider him a liberty candidate and completely ignore the 90%+ positive things he does.