Brian Miller accuses me of debating so well in an online forum that I allegedly caused one person who tried to argue with me to "lose interest in the LP". Meanwhile, the Ron Paul phenomenon was clearly biggest tsunami to hit the freedom movement in many decades. So how did the two Brians react to it?
One Brian participated in Ron Paul discussion forums, attended Ron Paul meetups, helped publicize Ron Paul rallies, gathered scores of email addresses of Ron Paul supporters by joining the top 20 California Paul meetups, and worked with the LPCA leadership on a systematic effort to reach out to the R3VOLution.
The other Brian spent months posting scores of messages to major California liberty-oriented forums attacking Ron Paul, saying
* Ron Paul is "a homophobic bigot";
* Ron Paul "declares he isn't a libertarian";
* Ron Paul is "a statist on health care";
* Ron Paul "voted for continued government spending on education";
* Ron Paul "committed himself to pursuing increased government funding of abstinence education in the future"
* Ron Paul "declares he isn't a libertarian";
* Ron Paul is "a statist on health care";
* Ron Paul "voted for continued government spending on education";
* Ron Paul "committed himself to pursuing increased government funding of abstinence education in the future"
You can guess which Brian is which. I repeatedly challenged Brian Miller to substantiate any of these recklessly false claims, but Miller never did. He didn't even dare acknowledge that on the last point, Ron Paul was clearly misinterpreted on his answer to the question of whether Paul would "bring abstinence education funding onto equal ground with contraceptive- based education". Ron Paul answered yes, like every good libertarian who knows that zero equals zero.
I even offered to donate $1000 to the Outright Libertarians if Miller could back up his ridiculous claim that Ron Paul says (outside of the context of party affiliation) that he "is not a libertarian". Miller never even tried, but he just kept repeating this lie.
It's amusing for Miller to charge that I debate in order to "protect [my] political authority in the various county, state, and national committees you sit on". First of all, I haven't been on any county committees during the time Miller lived in California. Second, my position on the LPCA ExCom may have been helped by my reputation as a defender and explainer of libertarian ideas, but what got me elected was that I was the only candidate with a detailed written strategic and tactical vision: http://knowinghumans.net/2007/04/lpca-strategy-tactics.html. Third, the only national committee I'm on is the Platform Committee, which a) is inherently about debating Platform language and b) conducts its debates on a private forum.
Those are the facts. Miller offers no facts, only venom. And then lectures the TPW readership about "ethical debate".
