I never demonized him, and I deplore that sort of name-calling, even if the target is a Dem.
My criticism of Peden was that he was backed by a GOP establishment that hadn’t shown much competence in picking strong candidates (e.g. Shelley Sekula-Gibbs). That, and he was backed by figures in the national GOP establishment, such as Pat Ruffini, who seemed to have a vendetta against Paul for his anti-war position. I don’t think that the GOP should engage in cleansing itself of Republicans who take heterodox positions.
The endorsements from such papers as the Galveston County Daily News seemed to be plaints that Paul wasn’t bringing home “their share” of the booty from the taxpayers. Well, if it wasn’t for misguided self-interest masquerading as acting in the public interest, we wouldn’t have a massive federal government.
Finally, Wonkette’s endorsement of Peden and characterization of Paul’s campaign as “wierd” did nothing but elevate Paul and downgrade Peden in my eyes. There is no better barometer of the top-of-mind DC cocktail party circuit opinion than the blatherings of that strumpet.
In the end, what Paul did is something that a so-called mainstream conservative (if we define this as being pro-WoT) couldn’t do, which is open the minds of those who are anti-war to conservative ideas. They may never agree with us on the war, but might be allies on other issues in the future.
The ironic thing is that Peden is actually pretty damned libertarian, which is more or less the polar opposite of neoconservative. I agree he's a good dude, but it really was hilarious as hell to rub his loss in the face of the more obnoxious anti-Paulites.