[Sabertooth]

Frequently of FR we will see articles written by Mr. Sobran, and see them held forth as some distillation of deep thought by those "true conservatives" of the paleocon right.

Worthless flamebait. The whole paleocon-neocon dichotomy is forced. Archane political labels have utility as shorthand generalizations, but little else.

So Sobran is a gossamer-veiled anti-Semite. He's a scumbag, no news there.

Are paleos therefore always anti-Semites?

What if one is a domestic paleo and a foreign policy neo?

Is there a foreign/domestic, paleo/neo checklist? Or a checkerboard, like the Libertarians use on college campus registration drives?

Here, select these colors in order of preference, send me $19.95, and I'll tell you your paleo/neo profile.

[AmishDude]

Are paleos therefore always anti-Semites?

That's a good question. Of course, anyone can style himself a paleo and not be an anti-Semite, but it seems more than a little curious to me that, among the professional writers who style themselves paleocons these days, they tend to eminate the same wavelength on the Israel question and tend to eminate it quite brightly.

[stands2reason]

What if one is a domestic paleo and a foreign policy neo?

You mean, a strict constitutionalist plus non-isolationist? I think of myself as such. We can't pretend that USA circa 1789 and USA circa 2003 are the same animals on the world stage, and I don't want us to ever be less powerful than France again.

[Torie]

I already know my paleo/neo profile. :)

[Valin]

Words of reason, which I predict will go unheeded.