I got news for you: you already consider everything you put out as "factually accurate" whether I respond to it or not, and even after I or others prove you wrong.<quoted text>"Hawaiian Republican," since you continue to refuse to answer any questions that will help me qualify what's valid, from this point forward I will be making certain assumptions.
For instance, any posting I put out as point of fact that you do not respond to negatively will be considered "factually accurate" as you have clearly pointed out those posts you consider inaccurate or not on topic.
You're flailing so much I have a difficult time trying to understand the alternating points you keep trying to push. Which is why I have been asking clarification from you but you refuse to answer.
From this point forward I will be making my own assumptions about you.
First, you are deliberately a very selective reader. Anything that doesn't support your own opinions, will be conveniently ignored or mischaracterized.
Second, whenever you are solidly proven wrong, you will either completely ignore the initial point or shift the discussion to something else.
Third, most of your sources will have nothing to do with the specific issue being discussed and will likely be from questionable sources.
Fourth, your the best damn "wiggler" I have ever seen...and that's not meant as a compliment.