When I read this while research paleo -- a word I did not know what it meant -- I figured I must not be the only one who had not read this article.
Have wondered about Novak and Hagel both -- this sure went a long way toward explaining their positions and attacks on the Bush Administration.
Your quote summed it up perfectly for me -- "Unfortunately, we on FR have to contend with such knuckleheads every day." Couldn't agree with you more!
I thought this comment from the article was telling:
True conservatives, Tonsor said, were Roman Catholic at root, or at a minimum Anglo-Catholic. They studied literature, not the social sciences.If that isn't fringe thinking, I don't know what is.
Truth be told, "conservatism" is a big tent, or at least has to be if we expect to ever win any elections. If the pure paleos were to expunge those of us they think are squishy, those who are left would amount to about 15% of the electorate. To "win" doesn't mean getting 100% of what you may want, but in reality, getting perhaps a bit more than 50% of what you want. I'll take it, because the alternative represents about 99% of what I DON'T want. Unfortunately, some people would rather be "right" than to ever win elections.