[mrustow]

I look on Townhall.com, which has Reese, Sobran and Buchanan as columnists as well as a raft of neocons. Let's go to your names:

Robert Locke: Not there
Jim Kalb: Not there
Lawrence Auster: Not there
Matthew Alexander: Not there
Paul Gottfried: Not there
Serge [sic] Trifkovic: Not there

For all I know, you could have been listing your bridge club.

Now, I see Trifkovic and Gottfried have written books. Trifkovic wrote "The Sword of the Prophet," a scathing critique of Islam, and Gottfried wrote "After Liberalism: Mass Democracy In The Managerial State" and "Multiculturalism and the Politics of Guilt". But it's impossible for me to evaluate whether either of these men is a paleocon, but it is quite clear that they are not movement-leaders of any kind.

Robert Locke is brilliant. Lawrence Auster is very important, but I have not read as much of his work as I would like. Back during the 90s, I read a lot of journalism from Trifkovic in Chronicles on the wars in the former Yugoslavia, but was unable to determine whose judgment of the war was right. Paul Gottfried is the leading theorist of paleo-conservatism. I am unfamiliar with Jim Kalb and Matthew Alexander.

Since Townhall.com is a mainstream Republican site, citing it as a criticism of Gottfried, et al., is ludicrous. Do a google search of each of the names in question, do your homework, and then you'll be able to make evaluations. It's very possible.

[AmishDude]

"Serge" is not a [sic], this is the way he spells it for his book. I realize it's a transliteration. Further, they are writers in non-mainstream publications, which bolsters my point. The movement is defined by those who represent it to the public and the only paleocon columnists who are syndicated to any reasonable extent are Buchanan, Sobran and Reese.

I'm sure there are a few important paleocons writing for Penny Savers throughout the country but they just don't count.