Non-sequitur rejected. I accept your retreat!

The epistemological and philosophic burden of proof lies with the one making the positive claim.

Correct.

Pursuing anything with any flavor of Libertarianism has worked out — where? Ever?

On the line you argue, it would be more accurate to say that is started with Newt Gingrich, Karl Rove and their reactive approach to Clinton's presidency.

The right to offensive speech is the only hill one is ever asked to die upon in defense of the first amendment. The point here is that there is no consensus on 'offensive' speech, and by extension, offensive thought.

You are confusing the Democratic Party with liberals.

Everybody thinks they are right. Not everyone can be correct. This observation includes Parker and Stone.

Bingo. All nuance or substance is flattened out to the extreme edges of outrage around any topic. It is the Disenlightenment.

It is an interesting conceit in the article that a generation was raised starting at the age of 15…

Timelords can, if they are advanced, control regeneration, per canon. This has only recently been retconned to include gender flipping.

Romanadvoratrelundar — known in short as Romana — was a Time Lady who was assigned the task to assist the Fourth Doctor in his quest for the Key to Time.

Asked in a questionnaire whether he would take part if his opponents did the same, Mr. Obama wrote yes. But he added, “If I am the Democratic nominee, I will aggressively pursue an agreement with the Republican nominee to preserve a publicly financed general election.”

The plural of pegasus is pegai. Alternately, the term 'pterippus' (meaning winged horse, plural 'pterippi' could be used.

Class dismissed.

The rhetorical question "Does anyone?" was answered in the affirmative.

You don't. She is standing over my shoulder laughing at you.

I accept your retreat on the 'not blonde enough' straw man.

If you hadn't have said anything at all, I wouldn't have commented. Go figure. How is this existential tour relevant?

Relevance?