I didn’t know Judge Nap had incurred the wrath of the PC thought police, or at least any more than any other rightish libertarian of some renown, but apparently he has. You see, the Judge has been identified as a Confederate apologist by the guardians of rightthink, and Ran Paul is supposedly to be faulted for writing a forward for Judge Nap’s book. Wow, the PC police get to target two birds with one stone here, the Judge and Rand Paul. (Three actually, because Jack Hunter’s thoroughly beaten Southern Avenger corpse gets dug back up for a few more good whacks)
Judge Nap is really good on most issues except immigration where he has swallowed the open borders libertarian Kool-Aid, although he has been good on calling out Obama on his executive amnesty. But go here and buy his book just to spite MediaMatters, which you might recall was founded by our old friend David Brock of Am Spec Troopergate fame.
There’s a lot here, so just a few thoughts. So David Brock now thinks it was disreputable to publish well sourced stories about Clinton’s shenanigan’s with women, the truth of which was confirmed in the case of “Paula,” and hasn’t really been seriously challenged otherwise on truthfulness grounds, as far as I know, but it’s perfectly OK to police thoughts so that groupthink will not be challenged? Mr. Brock has a strange sense of what honest journalism is supposed to be about. Apparently it is to reinforce conventional wisdom rather than challenge the powers that be.
Second, you see how much good Rand’s pandering on race has done him. He’s still a thoughtcriminal because he writes a forward for Judge Nap and once employed you know who. Jack Hunter gets dragged up again because Nap defended him when he was the subject of the thoughtpolicer’s two minute hate, despite the fact that Jack has been bending over backwards to prove he’s not a wrongthinker, as anyone who follows his output at Rare or is Facebook friends with him knows. So how’s that working for you Rand and Jack?
Lastly, I think one reason certain libertarians who ought to know better gravitate to the open borders position is because they think it inoculates them from the charge of wrongthink. I don’t know if this is Judge Nap’s motivation or if he just really buys the whole open borders libertarian foolishness, but if it is, I’ll ask him the same question I asked Rand and Jack. “How’s that working for you.” (With acknowledgement to Dr. Phil.) In the eyes of the rightthink enforcers, if you are a thoughtcriminal in one area you are a thoughtcriminal in total, so the inoculation game is never going to work.