http://thirdpartywatch.com/2008/01/12/libertarian-radicals-and-reformers-deb ate/ Wes, I'm not interested in debate enough to correct your feigned exagerrila ignorance about the meaning of well-known freedom-movement concepts like 'libervention' and 'geolibertarianism'. Suffice it to say that I agree with the radicals that "ideas matter", and I'll leave you and our mutual friend Scott Lieberman to carry the flag for "real politics". As for your "debate society weirdo" crack, well, thanks for completely eliminating whatever residual credibility you may have had for your initial "came across as a jerk" judgment. Next time, please emulated Tom Blanton, and include your insults in the very same comment where you accuse me of incivility, so that readers don't have to connect those two dots. If you think I'm only about Platform debates (and the expenses and long hours I'm putting in to repair the Portland Crater), then I'd like to know who you think just spent several evenings during his Christmas trip putting together sorted spreadsheets of RegLibs for 60+ LPCA candidates to help them petition for ballot access. I'd like to know who you think just rolled up his sleeves and showed how to cut enough thousands of dollars of fat from the LPCA newsletter budget to finish balancing our budget. I'd like to know who you think last year gave a detailed practical blueprint for how the LPCA can do more with less: http://knowinghumans.net/2007/04/lpca-strategy-tactics.html. I'd really like to know who you think has cut over $4700 of checks from my checking account over the last four years toward LPCA causes: http://knowinghumans.net/2007/11/my-political-spending-history.html. It's real cute how you're stalking me in the TPW comments these days, and it's fun to finally have my first groupie, but don't you as LPTX executive director have better things to do with your time? Susan, you say it's "bizarre" for me to complain that you didn't respond to the specifics in my first round of answers. In my first round I 1) named at least 8 different schools of libertarianism, 2) referenced the multiplicity of those schools at least five times, 3) quoted seven full sentences from the reformer draft platform, 4) gave you a link to the full text of the draft that you days later said will be an "abomination", 5) described three principled alternatives to ZAP absolutism, 6) cited six moderate Ron Paul positions, and 7) gave two reasons why anarchists in particular should support a growing moderate LP. Your rebuttal didn't engage a single item from the 28 predicates I just listed, so your "bizarre" rejoinder just doesn't wash. In contrast to all my specifics, your response gave zero defense of the specific extremist positions that radicals want to restore to the Platform, zero specific criticism of the reformer SoP and Platform proposals that you've been aware of for months, and zero engagement of the idea that reformers could possibly have any legitimate disagreements with radicals over principle. Your answers could be described by someone less civil than I using the same terms that you and other radicals routinely use against platform reform efforts: "nerf", "lite", "weenie", "watered down", "wishy-washy", and "timid". Your answers didn't sound at all like someone leading an organization dedicated to "educating LP members about the Party's core principles". Is that still the mission of the Radical Caucus, or is it now more a vehicle for your campaign to get elected to the LNC? If you're "sure" now that the 2004 Platform "will be carefully deliberated and discussed", then it sure would be nice for you start defending its most extremist elements:
* immediate non-enforcement of all tax laws; * allowing personal secession from all government jurisdiction; * privatizing every road and street and public park; * legalizing partial-birth abortions; * allowing private ownership of any kind of weapon regardless of riskiness; and * "repeal[ing] all laws that restrict anyone, including children, from engaging in voluntary exchanges of goods, services, or information regarding human sexuality". Ripley, I have ALWAYS said that Platform reform is no silver bullet, and that its focus should be disarming the internal factions within the LP, rather than writing some magical brochure that will finally make the scales fall from voters' eyes. I made that clear in my debate with Susan: "Platform repair is necessary for building a bigger party and tipping elections, but it's hardly sufficient." You should focus a little less on the gratuitous sarcasm, and a little more on your reading comprehension.
