Quite the opposite. Is English a second language for you? The opinions of the author are not mine, necessarily. Of course, I could claim I was a Libertarian and support big government, but then I'd be talking out of my ass - much the same way you do.
libertarians are not against "big" government. We're against inefficient government. If the government could actually do something worthwhile in an efficient manner that would not violate my libertarian principles. If you believe government is bad, you will create a bad government. But I agree, we could cut the size of government from now till the cows come home and it would never even be close to conservative, let alone libertarian.
Libertarians ARE against big government. They are certainly against big federal government, and arguably against "big" state government. I put "big" in quotes because when it comes to state government responsibility, "big" is relative. Federal, however, there can be no argument. Libertarians certainly do not believe everyone should get food stamps, like you advocate. State government should have the powers to do a good deal more (what is currently managed at the Federal level), and Federal a lot less.
you have a very shallow limited idea about libertarianism. Until you become one, stick to what you know. Don't tell me what I am for or against. You have stereotyped the libertarian. In your mind, he must believe exactly what is on some website you read. I could read the RNC platform and claim anybody who disagrees with any plank is not a republican, even though he always votes a straight republican ticket.
Quite the contrary, actually. Libertarians follow a set of principles that adhere uniformly across the board on a variety of topics. You fail to understand this, and that's your problem. You think you can go against those principles on certain topics where you feel strongly the opposite, and that's fine - you can. But that's not the Libertarian position on it, it's your position. You can still be a Libertarian and have a different view than the platform on a subject. For example, I am at odds on abortion with the Libertarian platform. My personal beliefs cause me to struggle with the right to life/choice argument. But I recognize that, and don't try to ridiculously defend my position as Libertarian on that subject. That's the difference - you do try to defend positions at odds with the platform, calling it Libertarian. That's what makes you look so silly.