Alex, it sounds like you and I are dangerously close to total agreement on LP campaign strategy. It seems our main area of disagreement is whether 1) that strategy is best served if the detailed positions of our Platform and presidential candidate are in tune with our message to voters, vs. 2) it is safe to indulge in a Platform and candidate whose detailed positions are actually much more radical than the LP message that we want the average voter to hear.
Your Browne quote sums up our agreement on campaign strategy very well. That speech (to an unidentified audience) is obviously not intended to satisfy my request for a radical LP candidate making the hardcore radical pitch to a general-voter audience.
I don't agree that a radical candidate couldn't promise much more than to not accept a tax-financed salary. That's actually only one element of a 30-point pledge that I've challenged radical libertarians to endorse: http://libertarianmajority.net/no-1st-force-pledge. You can think of it as a scoring system for how radical you are in your political strategy. I score 0 out of 30. So far you score 1 out of 30, but I wonder if you can do better. :-)
