Wow, your reasoning is amazingly shoddy. For the demolition of your argument, I must announce the following facts: First, I believe B. Obama is nearly singlehandedly orchestrating the destruction of the American Republic, and it is the responsibility of every thinking person to oppose his reign. Further exposing your assumptions as ignorant, I am a Ron Paul fan myself, as I find him pretty much the only politician who gets most of it right. If we don't stop this runaway entitlement spending, reckless taxation, and innovation-choking regulation, we're going the way of France, Greece, or worse.

Further obliterating your point, I should remind you that I never advocated the young vixen to cease her servicing of Mr. Mitchell. Thus, I never tried to "control" anything. I merely pointed out that Mitchell was being quite glib with his hyperlink diction, and that the word of his shenanigans (and the near universal revulsion for such behavior by a father of three) was out. I supported no regulation or restriction. I'd urge you to read everything again, carefully this time.

I'm not the only one who thinks he's gross. I'm just the only one willing to leave a comment on a website.

Now that I've exposed your post as illogical rubbish, I'll finish the job by explaining my presence here. I received the link to this page through the many free-market newsletters I regularly receive as part of my fidelity to the cause (which you'd know nothing about). I clicked on and was rather amused by the read, so I left a brief comment. God forbid!

I never planned on staying, except for the credulous trolls who hilariously thought I was making something up, and proceeded to insult me. I received these responses via email, so I then responded, as even the most elementary theories of social contracts hold that self-defense is a proper exertion of force. You can check that yourself, again.

If you all stop trying to argue with me, I'll stop posting. I don't intend to stay. I just want to spread the truth, and the truth shall set you free. So will we live and let live? Honestly, it would be better for everyone involved.

Jew is in your screen name, Mr. Sensitive. Why does calling you that evince any bias? Would you prefer RedWhite? More fundamentally, do people normally use screen names whose mere mention is an indication of intolerance? Only you I guess.

Nice attempt at an insult, but if you didn't notice, it's Mr. Daniel J. Mitchell who is molesting children. Okay, maybe she's legal, but barely.

Oh, and yes, indeed - it's substantiated. Talk to someone who runs in the circles Mr. Mitchell runs in, and you'll get all the substantiation you need, my friend. Just because you hang around on the internet all day doesn't mean these things don't happen in the real world.

I guess you're talking to me, Jew. You make me laugh, too - for the love of God, please go to a Cato Institute event and observe these two together and all over each other, and then come back and apologize to me. Or if you can't believe your eyes, ask around and confirm that everyone knows they're together and everyone thinks it's gross. I'll even give you an advance on the acceptance for your apology - that's what a great person I am.

Dear CommonSense, if you spent any time around the libertarian movement, or any time around the policy institutes you support here, you would have seen Mr. Mitchell and Ms. Alaghebandian traveling together to numerous Cato events and others, making no secret about the fact they are openly dating. You can ask anyone else who has such knowledge or access, and they will confirm that point as well as the fact that both are disgusting.

Obviously you agree, because you don't defend Mr. Mitchell and Ms. Alaghebandian, but rather vainly argue that talk of their partnership is nothing but a "falsehood". This implicitly concedes that you, like me, would be disgusted to know they're actually in a sexual (not just a professional) relationship.

I'm glad you'd like me to ignore this and pretend its a "falsehood" and "male chauvinism", but unlike you, I know the truth. It might behoove you to remove the wool over your eyes and realize your beloved tax policy wonk is a disturbing lecher, and your beloved video hostess is riding a grandpa. If anyone's a chauvinist, it's the 52 year-old Mitchell nailing the girl barely over a third his age!

Wake the heck up!

Hey 14 year old, I know you're desperate and will F anything, that's why you're 14 and pathetically horny. Let your sack drop and then you can talk like a man. Meanwhile keep shining your knob, someday a real live human girl will give you a chance...

BTW, you think a commie would quote William Buckley? Dumb azz...

Hahahahahaha....

She's the one F-ing the 52-year old father of 3, Dr. Daniel J. Mitchell. I don't have to call her a slut, the facts speak for themselves. (Oh, you don't know? What a shame - get some connects, son.)

Spin it how you want to, bucko, but don't get so upset next time. Your emotions really get the best of you, and it really makes you look bad.

By the way, do you think "a$$hat" is really even an insult? (For what it's worth, it just made me laugh. A lot.)

In the words of the great William F. Buckley, I'd take you seriously, but to do so would affront your intelligence.

Wow, Mitchell, nice thinly veiled admission that you're defiling a girl a third of your age. Pure class...I'm sure your kids are proud.