Brian Miller wrote: BM) I don't normally indulge your content-free trolling (BM
I quote claims and rebut them with facts. You spew vague and undefended distortions. In December I posted (at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/marketliberal/message/2456) an offer of $1000 for the Outright Libertarians if you can back up your claim that Ron Paul "declares he isn't a libertarian" by quoting him saying that (outside of the context of party membership, of course). My cash remains unclaimed, and that message gives half a dozen other quotes from you about Ron Paul that remain utterly unsubstantiated and thus content-free. BM) your apparently complete disconnect with the Libertarian Party's mainstream (as evidenced by your clumsy platform posturing and more recently, by the Tuesday presidential preference primaries for the LP). (BM "Clumsy platform posturing"? Thanks for so quickly exhibiting the irony lacing your comment about "content-free". As for "complete disconnect", I'm not the one whose endorsed candidate garnered a shocking 6th-place finish with only 5% of the LPCA vote -- including an anemic 22 votes in the Outrights' own San Francisco county. By contrast, the top 3 vote-getters are all Ron Paul fans, and together pulled in over 53% of the vote. BM) Firstly, let me say that I'm not quite sure how a broken link, a link to a discussion group that neither I (nor any other Outright Ex-Com member, to my knowledge) participates in, a link referring to the LRC's push-poll on our platform, and various other irrelevant content links have any direct correlation to my original post. (BM The link was not broken on cal-libs, and was merely folded by ca-liberty's antediluvian ascii-only policy. A shorter version of it is: http://tinyurl.com/3482py. It's understandable that you didn't want to follow the link, since it documents what Outright moderators actually think about "free dialogue". The second link is to a message that also appeared on the Outright group and lpsf-discuss. It's still available at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/OutrightLibertarians/message/3120. It contains unrebutted documentation of you lying about Reform Caucus draft platforms, and my daring to cite it got me banned from the Outright list. The third link was directly in response to your content-free complaint about "misleading 'surveys'". It's hilarious how you can so brazenly claim that a link full of facts about the Platform survey has no "direct correlation" to your post commenting on the survey. In that link, http://knowinghumans.net/2008/02/platform-survey-rebukes-silence-and.html, I document how (contrary to content-free radical talking points) the survey results rebuked not only the radicals' preference for a detailed destinational Platform, but also even-handedly rebuked the short top-N-issues platform previously advocated by many reformers. My posting shows how I accurately predicted the responses received from over 2000 LP members, and that my only mistake was in overestimating the support for a top-N-issues platform (as opposed to PlatCom's current approach of pure directional principles with little implementation detail). http://tinyurl.com/3746wn is my takedown of your latest puerile "daddy knows best" mantra. The money shot was: "your casual dismissal of the multi-year efforts of a couple dozen PlatCom members and Caucus leaders as 'Brian knows best' is pitch-perfect irony." BM) Certainly, individuals such as yourself who have launched into direct personal attacks on other members on the Outright list will be moderated (BM I'm not the one who exhibited bigotry by disparaging someone for their demographics ("a straight white guy in suburbia"), or who made a crude implicit reference to somebody's spouse ("how to pleasure a woman"). All I did was supply unrebutted documentation of your willfully false statements. It turns out that for the Outright moderators, facts that are inconvenient can be censored if you just label them a "personal attack". BM) Bruce Cohen exercises a similar policy on this list. (BM Cohen banned Dondero for spewing a shocking stream of obscenities. This comparison is laughable. BM) the Republican you were throwing so much weight behind posted truly dismal numbers (BM I never made any claim that Paul was going to change the outcome of the GOP nomination race. The fact remains that he garnered unprecedented amounts of votes, donations, and activism. The question is: from what parts of Nolan space do his supporters hail? I suspect they are almost evenly distributed across the four quadrants. But even if you cut his numbers by 75%, it's still an unprecedented tsunami in the freedom movement. BM) In all three Libertarian primaries held on Tuesday, the putative winners have been pro-LGBT candidates (BM You might as well say that the winners of the LP primaries have all been pro-freedom. However, of all the LP contenders rated by Outright, the only one slightly dinged on your scorecard (Root) came in either second or third in all three races, and in two of them was only bested by vocal Ron Paul supporters. In the only two races for which we have data, the pro-Ron-Paul candidates (Kubby, Smith, Root) out-polled your anti-Ron-Paul candidate (Phillies) by 3-1 in Missouri, and 10-1 in California (and 8-1 in San Francisco). BM) and two of the three have expressed strong opposition to your efforts to gut our platform. (BM Neither of them have ever shown any evidence of having read the PlatCom's emerging draft. You (and they) are confusing the 2006 demolition of the old Platform (a document rightfully derided by your candidate Phillies) with the 2008 repair efforts of the current Platform committee. Regarding "gutting", I repeat the question that has muted every radical so far: what is "the most important libertarian PRINCIPLE that a majority of NatCon delegates would agree is missing from" our Pure Principles draft? Got an answer for "daddy" on that one? BM) you're way behind the curve in understanding the Libertarian electorate -- especially vis-a-vis Outright's board and general membership. (BM The facts above demonstrate otherwise. In addition, I've assembled the web's most comprehensive array of polling data about libertarians: http://libertarianmajority.net/libertarian-polling. Meanwhile, you and the Outrights couldn't get more votes for Phillies from the LPSF than can fit in Rob Power's living room. I too find Phillies' result very disturbing, as he is by his own admission the LP candidate most friendly to efforts to reform the Platform. However, the LP primaries were hardly a referendum on Platform reform, and contain orders of magnitude less data about member sentiment regarding Platform reform than does the recent Platform survey and the Restore04 petition.
