A small example.

One of the new Liberpublican types in the formerly libetarian Libertarian Party has been rather irrate with me. He doesn't like my essay concerning about what I saw in Denver. He was upset that I said the LP really doesn't deserve the term "the party of principle". This Liberpublican, Bruce Cohen, was a Root supporter by the way. He doesn't like the phrase "party of principle" and says it is just "a slogan made up for a promo" and that he is not "a defining statment" and is "insulting to outsiders and probably a mistake to use." I agree it's a mistake to use -- it's false advertising. 

However, Mr. Cohen uses this "insulting" "slogan" on his own website. So I replied: "So 'party of principle' is a mistake to use. I suggest you take it off your own website then since you clearly think it is a mistake and just a slogan with no meaning." Mr. Cohen replied: "I don't have the words 'party of principle" on my own website."  

Normally I would left this in the comments section but I can't post scree captures there. So I had to post it here. You will see that Mr. Cohen is clearly not being truthful with the readers here. As this screen capture of his website clearly shows he does use the term "party of principle" very prominently on his own website. He is telling porkies to my readers. Not only does this appear on his site, contrary to his own claim, but it appears on every page of his site. 

I don't see why he would make such a big deal of the "slogan" and then turn around falsely claim he doesn't use the slogan himself. At the very least I would have thought that before claiming it wasn't there that he would have the intelligence to go and remove it from his site first. Of course it may be that he doesn't know what it is on his own site. But then I would have thought he'd have gone and checked it out before insisting he doesn't use this term which he finds insulting. I personally don't find "the party of principle" insulting. These day, at best, I find it to be false advertising.