[quidnunc]

There is a philosophical principle known as Ockham’s (Occam's) Razor which postulates that when multiple competing hypotheses are put forward as possible solutions to a question, the simplest answer is most likely to be the correct one. (Before you can proceed to the improbable, you must first rule out the obvious.) The simplest answer to the question “Are Pat Buchanan and his paleo-con cohorts anti-Semitic?” is that based on all the evidence, yes they are.

When they speak of neo-conservatives you can almost hear them spitting out the word "Juden!"

[Poohbah]

Yup. Like I said, if he isn't an anti-Semite, he's working REAL hard to convince one and all that he is.

[caltrop]

What's it take to be an anti-Semite? Active hostility to Jews and/or Israel would, I presume, clearly qualify. More interesting, at least to me, would be whether simply not caring about Israel any more than one cares about Taiwan or Sri Lanka makes one an anti-Semite. Lately I get the sense that, at least here on FR, plenty of people would argue both positions qualify as anti-Semitic.

[rmlew]

Many paleo-cons are not anti-Semetic.
Please see Robert Locke of Frontpage magazine, and the folks who run "View From the Right" www.counterrevolution.net/vfr/

Paul Gottfried, Ralph de Toledeno, and Don Feder are Jewish paleocons. (Depending on how you define paleocon, so am I)