Being a libertarian I do not support all so called paleo ideas but I think your descriptions of certain positions here need some qualifying.
* protectionist - only if one supports managed trade and punitive tariffs. Not sure all paleos share Buchanan's trade policy views. However I do not see concern over the current economic transition a bad thing.
* nativist - The idea that a dominate race protecting itself from extinction is a great evil is a modern concept that is unevenly applied. Only white Europeans are expected to die off and take their culture with them. I can't fault those concerned over this even if some of their language is undiplomatic. Self preservation is a basic instinct after all.
* isolationist - free trade with all and foreign entanglements with none is not isolationist. None of the paleo's wish to turn the US into pre-Admiral Perry Japan.
* enthusiastic about waging the culture wars - Again when did self defense become so wrong? Cultures do naturally shift with time but the counterculture revolution that broke out en masse in the 1960's was a planned event - Gramscian. As a libertarian I see the problem is the government being involved with both sides of the war. I don't agree with some paleo fixes but I understand their concern.
* pessimistic about the future of American prospects - Anyone who understands that socialism is doomed to fail would be concerned.
* suspicious of the motives of Jews - I believe the concern is over some Americans having a passionate attachment to another country - our founders warned against this sort of thing. (Many Christians share this particular passion so it is not just a Jewish thing.) BTW if Ireland was the mess that the mid-east is I believe certain Irish Americans might be suspect then as they are passionate for their home country even after 5 generations here. (Living around some of these I know of what I speak.)
* nostalgia for the Confederacy - From what I read I see some of this as a regional sense identity and pride - it's pride in and defense of a cultural that is under constant attack. Others do not defend the Confederacy they see the constitutional argument of secession as being correct and call 'em as they see 'em. These types also see the birth of the strong central government and the demise of states rights beginning with the success of the north in the civil war.
All told I do not see paleos as nefarious but I do see where neocon's can't exist in the same movement with them.
cordially,
I don't know if I am a paleo but I oppose the war, support free trade, support more open immigration, am optimistic about American prospects, regard Martin Luther King as a great, though flawed, hero, and think that the CSA was a racist regime formed to defend slavery. I suspect that Novak's views are similar to mine on most of these issues. Frum, on the other hand, seems to regard us all as part of the same racist and antisemitic clique. He owes Novak an apology for his ugly McCarthyite smear article.
"Paleos tend to be protectionist, nativist, isolationist, enthusiastic about waging the culture wars, pessimistic about the future of American prospects, particularly from a cultural point of view, suspicious of the motives of Jews, and indulge a nostagia for the Confederacy."
And they wear stuff like this:
Dittos.