Any reformer spreading these despicable Ruwart smears is no "friend" of mine. All they're accomplishing is giving Ruwart an excuse not to address the substance of the embarrassing principles involved here. Kubby forwarded my 5 tough questions to Ruwart several hours before their show, but they conspicuously spent an hour on easy questions about anonymous smears and a poorly-thought-out press release. Ruwart and Cowan even emphasized that it's been about ten years since she wrote the comments in question, but I thought the reason radicals liked Ruwart is that she's been consistently "plumbline" for over a quarter century. I've now listened to several hours of Ruwart campaign appearances, and I don't think I've once heard her advocate or defend any of the radical principles that distinguish her from reformers/minarchists. So far, she's saying many of the the vague and happy things that Rothbard viciously attacked Clark about in 1980. Why nominate a zero-state abolitionist if she's not going to promote and defend that position? If we want a middle-of-the-libertarian-road campaign, why not nominate a middle-of-the-libertarian-road candidate, like Phillies? Radicals criticize reformers for allegedly advocating a stealth campaign strategy of disguising their libertarian principles, but Ruwart's anarchism is so stealth it's simply invisible -- at least to anybody who can't do a web search.