I do not intend to let him call people Nazis and so forth without any evidence and not be called on it. I am happy to leave the topic alone, it just takes the bigots to refrain from slander. Is that too much to ask here on Glenn's site?

Look, I am glad to see Paul giving the other GOP nominees hell and raising the issues that he does. But the reality is that he is a kook on some issues, like his fixation with the Gold Standard. Couple that with his having HIRED a total fascist like Gary North as a legislative aide, and I have to say I would not want him to be POTUS.

I don't think it is fair to ding him for his views on abortion or gay marriage -- he just thinks those issues should be left to the states, and does not support a Federal Marriage Amendment to the Constitution. Further, because some Stormfront people like him is no evidence he is one of them, any more than the CPUSA's support (except when Stalin ordered it suspended) of FDR made FDR a Commie. On the other hand, Gary North apparently thinks John Brown was one of the two worst individuals in American history, and Paul has undeniable ties to North.

All things considered, I do think, and have always thought, Paul is a bit of a nut. But he doesn't stand a chance at getting the nomination, and right now he is causing trouble for the authoritarians in the GOP primaries. And that is a good thing.

Well, I know why those LGFers and others do that with the ACLU stuff. (Not that I defend it -- I don't.) One of the founders, Roger Baldwin, was an anarchist and then a communist who admired Stalin. However, by the late 30s he and others had seen the light and purged the ACLU of Communist members.

American history is complex, and as evil as the Stalinists were, and even if, say, Emma Goldman paired up with a violent anarchist lover, they and godless men like Clarence Darrow were in the vanguard of defending civil liberties. They were way ahead on the issue of Jim Crow (with some notable exceptions -- many left-wing union leaders and members could be very racist). And in any event, he ACLU lost its Communist infestation a long time ago. I don't think Bob Barr would be working for a Commie outfit, and I agree with the bulk of what the ACLU does.

Yes, I posted a lenghtier excerpt from that Reason article about Gary North two threads below. I've trotted it out many times, usually when people want to know what my isue is with Lew Rockwell who hosts North's writings (tho not his clerical fascism themes.)

I have myriad issues with Lew Rockwell, and have had for decades. Which is why I was so disgusted when, early in UT history, someone snarked at me that I should go over to Lewrockwell.com where I "belong."

Gary North is simply the most stark example of how extreme that enclave is, and what they will put up with in terms of approving associations.

Cato and Reason libertarians are the sane, mainstream and pragmatic variety who are respected by many. The LAT hired Matt Welch, a former Reason editor. I cannot imagine their doing that with a Rockwell staffer.

You clearly do not understand the nature of the community here. many of us are regulars going back to Glenn's days at blogspot, and we became regulars because of his unique gifts in marhsalling facts and pointing to the Problems are so valuable.

I'm not the least offended by his promoting his book -- and I dare to speak for others by speculating that virtually none of his other regulars are, either. He speaks for us -- and we are ideologically diverse, not all of us are particularly liberal -- and getting his voice heard and made more influential is a goal widely shared by his long-time readership, of which you are not a member.

Why don't you STFU and see how the community interacts here with Glenn, before you continue your insulting rants?

I think it's well established, via the Straussian intellectual roots, as well as simple observation of how they operate--Wolfowitz at the World Bank, for example--that the neocons are predominantly manipulators of Manichean beliefs in the minds of others. This is all part of the Straussian "noble lie" schtick.

That is so true and well demonstrated as to be beyond reasonable dispute. And Tim, if you are still reading here, Paul Rosenberg and I agree on very little else save for the pernicious aspects of the neocons. My political sub-set -- libertarians -- have been identifying this Straussian pathology among the necons for decades.

The neocons, most of them, are not believers in any god(s) or theit ontological premises do not include notions that "God's" commandments exist. But they are past masters at manipulating the masses by pandering to the rubes' simplistic and Manichean beliefs, for their own nefarious, authoritarian and warmongering ends.

They have been extraordinarily successful in playing on George Bush's Good v. Evil worldview.

If you are really curious, you might want to download and install a copy of the Firefox web browser. While IE has it's strong points, Firefox has been tearing up the internet and giving Microsoft a run for its money.

IMHO it really is that good of a browser.

Absolutely. I made the switch over two years ago, and when for whatever reason or other I have to use IE, I am greatly annoyed.

That makes no sense to me. For one thing, they are very cooperative in hiring the developmentally disabled, which in my work I've seen them do repeatedly. For another, poor people can afford to shop there.

The purchasing power they give the poor is no small thing, and elitist members of the middle class should not be so judgmental.