[lifeofgrace]

Nevertheless the post is filled with unsupported assertions which display the author’s biases without providing any evidence that they are an accurate reflection of Paul’s policy positions. .

In other words : pure opinion.

So linking positions from Paul's own website or citing articles that directly quote him in context is pure opinion?

What do you consider fact?

[Hugh the Scot]

I certainly don’t consider hyperbolic extrapolation of constitutional ideas into pro -drugs, pro -crime positions as fact. Paul takes some positions that could be exploited. Not the same thing as saying he intends to exploit them.