A Rejoinder to the RonPaul.com Affairby James E. Miller
Feb. 15, 2013
1.Trump is Right: GOP Debate Audience is Packed Full of Republican Donors
2.Caught On Camera: Preacher Cited by Officer Because It's "Illegal to Offend People"
3.75-Yr-Old German Grandmother Tells of Sexual Harassment by Migrants, Interview Gets Interrupted by Clueless "Integrated" Muslim Teens
4.Man Says He Was Fired After Pulling Gun in Gun-Free Zone to Save Woman's Life
5.FOX Con-Artists Use Unnecessary Censorship To Make Trump Sound Like He Said 'F*ck'
6.EPA Rule to Ban Car Modification
7.Ticketing For Profit So Rampant, State Lawmakers Forced to Take Action -- Cops Are Furious
8.Soros: 'Putin Aims At EU Disintegration, Threat From Russia Bigger Than From Jihadi Attacks'
Sorry, but ICANN is hardly "private," it's a government granted monopoly with no competition, it's rules are reflective of the statist framework which it was created by and operates under. As a result, many of their rules are idiotic and antithetical to free markets, these trademark ones are case in point. - ChrisIn light of new facts previously unknown to me, the affair over ownership of RonPaul.com and RonPaul.org turns out to be more complicated than I originally considered. These warrant a written response -as does Robert Wenzel’s rebuttal to my criticism of his “designed” rights theory.