That "Isolated Incident" at the Holocaust Museum

As you have probably now heard, an 89-year-old anti-Semite with a Prussian junker name (James W. von Brunn) shot and killed a guard at the Holocaust museum this afternoon. Little surprise that he is a 9-11 truther, an Obama "birther," and a neo-Nazi psychopath.

At The New Republic's group blog, Jason Zengerle makes an eminently sensible point:

What I Hate About Our Warp-Speed News Cycle

At 12:52 P.M., an 88-year-old white supremacist walked into the Holocaust Museum in D.C. and opened fire. At 2:56 P.M., Greg Sargent was arguing that the shooting means "it's time to revisit criticism of 'right-wing extremists' report." Sheesh. I really miss the good old days--when it took at least three hours before the cheap political point-scoring started.

Asked whether tourists should be concerned about doddering fascists carrying shotguns, D.C. Mayor Adrian Fenty stressed to reporters that the shooting was an "extremely isolated incident." I suppose it is true that this type of incident is rare—an attack at the Holocaust museum, motivated by a Wagnerian anti-Semitism—but Mayor Fenty might acknowledge that, in 2008, there were 186 such "isolated incidents" in the district.

Comments

[jayjayhawker]

What? A Obama birther who is a nut job? What a shock

[Pedant]

Given that he's 89, wouldn't this guy qualify as a plain old "Nazi" rather than a "Neo-Nazi"?

[Sean W. Malone]

Michael:

What's with the cheap shot on Wagner? That guy wasn't an anti-semite so much as he was just generally certifiable. Low blow man... low blow.

*disclaimer: I am a Wagner fan.

[24AheadDotCom]

Another good job by Reason, sure to earn them two tickets to Sally Quinn's next shindig!

Meanwhile, the attempt to use a LogicalFallacy (GuiltByAssociation) to smear those who have questions about where Obama was actually born falls flat. All I did was make a few phone calls, but see the link for more real reporting than Michael Moynihan is capable of. And, if anyone disagrees, there's a challenge at the end of that summary: simply pick up the phone and ask those questions. The fact that no one has yet taken up that challenge tells you all you need to know about them and this issue.

[?]

That guy wasn't an anti-semite

Except that he hated Jews.

WTF?

[hmm]

DC needs to ban shotguns. They are clearly tools solely designed to exterminate Jewish people.

[jayjayhawker]

24AheadDotCom,

Again. You keep dodging my questions.
1. If you support freedom then shouldn't you be able to vote for who ever you want?
2. Isn't their multiple examples of Presidents who would have not have fulfilled the "natural citizen" requirement? The first 5 or 6 Presidents come to mind, and Goldwater was born in the Arizona territory. Isn't what defines a citizen always been a shifting vague standard?
3. Why isn't his mom being a citizen good enough?

I need to just copy these questions some where so I can paste them when Lone shows up. You refuse to discuss these issues, which suggest a weakness in your position.

[Sean W. Malone]

I was talking about Richard Wagner... A man who hated virtually everyone, was chronically paranoid, spent most of his life running from his own debts, had an affair with, then married the daughter of a colleague and by many accounts actually drove performers who worked with him to either permanent injury or mental breakdown. The fact that he also hated Jewish people seems pretty irrelevant.

Oh... plus as a bizarre addition, he actually hired Jewish musicians from time to time as well.

I'm just saying, Wagner was just nuts and calling him an anti-semite has always been silly to me in context of the rest of his beliefs. It's really just something that came about as guilt-by-association with Hitler. Besides, Wagner was long dead by the time the 3rd Reich were around.

He also never killed anyone as far as I know.

[Sean W. Malone]

Also, I think it's my duty to say:

Shut the fuck up LoneWacko!

[Jaybird]

"He also never killed anyone as far as I know."

Neither did Hitler.

[SugarFree]

Lonewacko accusing someone of using a LogicalFallacy is delightful.

[Jaybird]

Why hasn't Lonewacko asked Obama any of these questions?

Is he afraid?

[hmm]

You refuse to discuss these issues, which suggest a weakness in your position.

You refuse to go away, which suggests an inability to recognize no one fucking cares about you or your website.

[thoreau]

I've always feared the day when a nutjob attacks the guys at the security checkpoint. What will the response be? A checkpoint before the checkpoint?

[..]

Look for Keith Olbermann to somehow tie this in with Newt Cheynbaugh.

[ChicagoTom]

I really miss the good old days--when it took at least three hours before the cheap political point-scoring started.

This is not a sensible point at all.

After all the OUTRAGE by the right based on an accurate and eerily prescient DHS report, we have had 2 shootings by extremist right wing nut jobs in the last 2 weeks.

Now somehow it's "cheap politcal points" to point out that all that outrage was misplaced? I think it's more like pointing out the fucking obvious. The DHS report was right and extremism (esp. the militant right wing variety) is a legitimate threat.

Even Shepard Smith on Fox News notices the writing on the wall and the tone of many on the right and thinks it's dangerous (Link here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bxvunbIWNyI

Oh and by the way, Von Brunn had written an anti-Obama screend at the Free Republic that has since been taken down (Cached version available here )

[Sean W. Malone]

Hitler killed himself.

[Dagny T.]

I'm MIA for a few days, and you guys have already browbeaten L-Dub out of using his fail-safe disclaimer? How do you expect him to protect against AdHoms now, libertards?

[Sean W. Malone]

Chicago Tom;

We've also had an "isolated" Muslim terrorist attack on soldiers in Arkansas (not to mention the more obvious acts of Muslim extremism). Does that mean that we should assume that every Muslim needs to be on a watch list? Or for that matter, that Bush was right about everything "trrr" related?

[KT]

If wondering about the "right-wing extremists" report in light of recent incidents is wrong, then say why. I don't think the temporal proximity is relevant. If Sargent had waited a few hours or days or weeks, would his point somehow be better or more valid?

[thoreau]

While it is true that the report warned of violence from the right that has since materialized, one should still be careful in whom we cast pre-emptive suspicion on. There are millions of people who like to turn it up to 11 and say crazy shit on the intertubes, but 99.99% of them use it to relieve stress, not ramp it up.

Personally, I'd rather see the wackjobs nice and comfy on their couches, wearing their pajamas and typing to their hearts' content while munching on pizza and watching pr0n. For 99.99% of them, this will calm them down. They might act like jackasses, but they'll be fat and happy and benign.

[ChicagoTom]

We've also had an "isolated" Muslim terrorist attack on soldiers in Arkansas (not to mention the more obvious acts of Muslim extremism). Does that mean that we should assume that every Muslim needs to be on a watch list? Or for that matter, that Bush was right about everything "trrr" related?

Sean Malone,

are you stupid? Or just playing dumb? (I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume the latter)

You realize there are these words called qualifiers.

Yes I think we should keep an eye on extremist and militant Muslim groups as well as extremist or militant right wing groups (and left wing ones as well).

Did ANYONE advocating keeping an eye on "every" right wing group ? No so your straw man argument fails. Feel free to try again though.

Now let's turn it around. Do you advocate the government keeping an extemist/militant muslim groups? If so, why not extremist/militant right wing groups?

Maybe you could also explain, in light of recent events, why you the DHS report is wrong, or it is wrong to say to all the people that were outraged "the DHS report was right and your outrage was misplaced and wrongheaded" ?

Also, to the people who have defended water boarding....the killer of Dr. Tiller, once in custody said "there's more killings to come" -- shouldn't the government water board him to find out more about whats to come? Sounds like a ticking time bomb scenario to me (or at least closer to one than the scenarios of the "enemy combatants" who were waterboarded in military custody) -- how come no one advocates water boarding Right-Wing Christian terrorists?

[Sean W. Malone]

You know, regardless of the violent extremists out there who are "right wing", exactly where was the justification in those memos for the Ron Paul/Campaign for Liberty business... of course I'm annoyed with libertarians being lumped into "right wing" categories period.

[Elemenope]

That's fucked up. I just visited the Holocaust Museum for the first time two months ago. They had a neat exhibit on axis and allied propaganda. I do recall there being some metal detectors at the door though. How did this guy get through them...or did he just attack the guy at the door?

FWIW, the notion that Wagner's antisemitism was somehow besides the point of his general irascibility is laughable. How it relates to this case escapes me, though.

[jimbo]

Wouldn't the world be a better place if we were all a bit more scared of each other? Muslim, neo-nazi, Earth First!-er, I'm not going to taunt you because I'm worried you will shoot me.

Let's face it, lots of people will climb all over this guy because in reality the neo-nazis are pretty lame. You don't have to worry about them too much.

On the other hand, I'd love to make fun of the muslims a lot more, but I'm real worried they might be pinning their latest unreadable tracts - they invented pens don't you know - to my corpse with a knife.

It is sad to say, but if the neo-nazis want to be taken seriously, they better start killing any editorial columnist who dares mock them in the paper. Or do you think the courageous newsies at the paper will refuse to run them out of sensibility for the bigots?

Screw brotherhood! Let's get serious, arm everyone and start to get our manners in line because we are worried about getting shot.

[Seamus]

Yes I think we should keep an eye on extremist and militant Muslim groups as well as extremist or militant right wing groups (and left wing ones as well).

So what's your definition of an "extremist right wing group" that ought to be monitored? One that advocated the criminalization of abortion? Would the John Birch Society qualify? How about the NRA?

[Sean W. Malone]

Tom;

Those DHS memos threw a VERY wide net, and many of those potentially caught in it had nothing to do with the kinds of extremist movements you're talking about.

Where are the libertarian anti-abortion bombers/murderers? Holocaust-denying security guard killers?

Your qualifier of extremist groups and limiting the government net to people who actually are a threat is one thing, but the DHS report really wasn't like that at all. It just lumped people like *me* (and many other regular Reason commentors) in with people like Tim McVeigh. It also blurs the line of people like various friends who are seriously worried about things like hyper-inflation and who have recently bought guns to protect their families when things start to get a lot worse around here.

Frankly, I think those people are going to be wrong, but they're not terrorists, or extremists who are going to go kill anyone. But the DHS report bullshit results in stuff like this, and much worse. My point was that those reports are as right about "extremists" as any Pentagon preparation memos trying to keep law-enforcement ready to go... but they were also so broad that they push us toward a police state where walking through an airport with a box of cash and the wrong bumper stickers can get you thrown in jail.

[Sean W. Malone]

LMNOP - You're wrong 😛

[Rex Rhino]

Yes I think we should keep an eye on extremist and militant Muslim groups as well as extremist or militant right wing groups (and left wing ones as well).

I suppose it is too much to expect a totalitarian to understand and acknowledge, but I will give it a try:

The concepts "extreme" and "militant" are pretty damn vague and subjective... and virtually every political group has been accused of these things at some time. In reality when you authorize the government to keep "keep an eye" to people, you are essentially giving them free reign to spy on any and all U.S. citizens.

For most freedom loving people, the fear of having a political speech police force looking for "potential militants" is a lot scarier than the astronomically unlikely attacks they are designed to prevent.

But then again, you already know that. What people like you are really looking for is a pre-tense for a totalitarian police state.

Do you advocate the government keeping an extemist/militant muslim groups?

No.

If I mercilessly kill your strawman, does that count as militant behavior?

[hmm]

We should just have the government watch everyone equally then these sorts of things wouldn't happen. We could all be safe.

[hmm]

My wife calls me militant and I use extreme deodorant. Does this qualify me for watching?

Come to think of it half the shit I use or buy is extreme, damn you marketers.

[LarryA]

After all the OUTRAGE by the right based on an accurate and eerily prescient DHS report, we have had 2 shootings by extremist right wing nut jobs in the last 2 weeks.

The DHS reports, right and left wing, covered a couple hundred million people. That's really useful in figuring out that these two individuals were going to snap.

Note that once again these two shootings were in "gun-free" zones. D.C. prohibits concealed carry generally and Kansas prohibits carrying in "any church or temple." (PDF)

[Sean W. Malone]

Hmm: This kind of EXTREME!?

[SugarFree]

how come no one advocates water boarding Right-Wing Christian terrorists?

Goddamn, you ChicagoTom! I hate having to choose been principles and entertainment.

[EJM]

Come to think of it half the shit I use or buy is extreme, damn you marketers.

And the other half may simply be "xtreme".

[JW Gacy]

LMNOP, I think your comment says something interesting about our society. People can actually do all kinds of reprehensible things, and we'll forgive them. But, if somebody has racist ideas, even if they never ever act on them, then that's just too much.

I dunno. Racism's pretty bad, but I'm with Sean on this one. Wagner's other character flaws seem to be what caused all of his really bad actions. In that context, his anti-semitism really was "beside the point."

[libertymike]

Has anybody checked out the two links posted in the last sentence of Moynihan's first paragraph?

I have. First, as to Moynihan's assertion of fact that Mr. Von Brunn is a 9/11 truther, Moynihan supplies a link to signature page 92 out of 167 signature pages of a petition drafted by a group named Justice for 9/11. I see that a Mr. James von Brunn of Maryland is listed. I guess because he apparently lent his name to a petition seeking that the state of New York convene an independent grand jury to look into possible 9/11 crimes means he is a so called "truther." Moynihan provides no examples of Mr. von Brunn's writing on the subject, nor any videos.

Second, as to his assertion of fact that Mr. von Brunn is an Obama "birther", Moynihan supplies a link to a QUESTION a person claiming to be Mr. von Brunn, from Olso, Norway-not Maryland, posed in the reader comments section of the Economic Times. In the question, there is no mention of Obama's birth certificate.

How about Moynihan's baseless, unfounded, group associations? Not the most critical of thinkers.

The upshot: Moynihan is sloppy and can not be relied upon to get the Who, What, When and Where right. Getting the Why right is beyond his pay grade.

[Fluffy]

Did ANYONE advocating keeping an eye on "every" right wing group ?

Actually, ChicagoTom, you stupid cunt, that's exactly what the report did say.

The report said that law enforcement personnel should pay special attention to people associated with the Ron Paul presidential campaign.

I missed the part of these recent news reports where either Tiller's murderer or this von Brunn guy worked on the Ron Paul campaign.

And unless they did, then the report wasn't "prescient" at all, but bullshit crap that was the work of douchebag statist cunts.

[Fluffy]

And I think the "truthers" are crazy, but since they're 30% of the public, isn't there a 30% chance that just about any crime will be committed by one of them? Isn't it a little shitty to say "of course" this guy was one of them?

I'll betcha Bernie Madoff wasn't a Truther. Should I go around finding everything he has in common with Moynihan, and advance this as evidence that Moynihan is somehow dangerous and corrupt? "Moynihan is a staunch supporter of Israel, like Bernie Madoff, of course"? Would that be fair?

[matt]

I sign all sorts of things. If I'm ever wrongfully accused of eco-terrorism, will all the petitions I've signed on campus be fair game?

I'll sign any old thing. It honestly warms my heart that people are out there trying to put things on ballots or just raising awareness in general.

Profiling me based on the petitions I've signed over the years would be tedious and misleading. I'd even sign a fire Michael Moynihan petition.

[hmm]

Hmm: This kind of EXTREME!?

Pretty much. I have always wanted to see Vagisil, Summers Eve, or Tampax get on the extreme marketing band wagon. Now that would be entertaining.

I live in MO where one of the absurd papers was written concerning extremists. I've wanted to make a bumper sticker with everyone of the identified symbols listed, I just haven't gotten to it.

[Robert Kelly]

The killing at the museum make me feel very depressed. What is happening? I know there are many people who also think this anti-Jewish feeling is getting worse. I've heard things in public that I didn't use to hear about Jews and Israel. It's all over the internet. And it used to not be this way.

Von Brunn probably held these views for many years, but only now did he act on it, setting an example. He was a "lone wolf" per terrorism parlance. But I can't help but think this is part of a larger pattern of anti-Semitic violence and rhetoric. I think many people, a lot more people than most of us probably realize, are using Jews as a scapegoat for their problems.

I don't want to be the pessimist, but I doubt this is just a blip, but something more sinister that's growing and developing. And there's nothing I can do about it to prevent it from spreading. What can we do? It's the sense of helplessness that's most depressing.

[hmm]

I prefer not to sign anything. Arguing with people asking you to sign a petition is much more entertaining. If you get someone who isn't a tard it's a good conversation and can actually be fun, if you get a tard it is almost nirvana as you make them melt down.

[Sean W. Malone]

Thanks JW!

Also - I might note that also with respect to Wagner, his Anti-Semitism wasn't really all that odd for a mid 19th Century German. That again makes it interesting to me that people associate Wagner with being a racist more than they associate him with just being generally crazy.

Within the context of 1840s Europe, hating the Jews just seems like a given... Hardly the most notable thing about anyone. It'd be like saying that General Robert E. Lee was a racist as if that was somehow made him different from 99% of his contemporaries and is more important than his other ideas or abilities.

It's always just seemed odd to me. And again - the only reason we really do that is just because of the Hitler connection... and in what universe is it a composer's fault that some murderous dictator liked what he did? I bet FDR liked John Philip Sousa, should I now associate Sousa marches with the imprisonment of Japanese people?

[libertymike]

Fluffy-

You're making my point.

Furthermore, Moyniham, as well as far too many H&R posters, conflates any one or more individuals or groups who proclaim that they have the right story or the truth as to what happened with all those who question the official government conspiracy theory but do not have a specific theory as to who orchestrated and who assisted.

[libertymike]

Robert Kelly, did you have such thoughts after the rape of Gaza with the slaying of hundreds of women and children and the deliberate targeting of schools and UN and Red Cross relief workers?

[Robert Kelly]

Really, libertymike, you fascist crackpot, that didn't occur to me.

@ S. Malone

You write:

"You know, regardless of the violent extremists out there who are 'right wing', exactly where was the justification in those memos for the Ron Paul/Campaign for Liberty business..."

As you point out, the DHS report may have too broadly labeled Paul supporters as extremists, but from what I understand indication of support for Ron Paul was presented as a sign that may fit into a larger pattern. It's not: Ron Paul supporters are to be watched by the feds. But: Support for Ron Paul is not a sign of anything by itself except support for Ron Paul, however, it is one of numerous signs that this person may be an extremist. It's simple intelligence work.

And frankly, the reason it's such a warning sign is because nearly every cornpone wannabe fascist in this country has latched on to him. I mean, the ongoing "rEVOLution" is hardly libertarian. It's more hypernationalist anti-immigrant loathing, flag waving middle-class resentment. A lot of these folks think they're carrying on the rebirth of the Founding Fathers (our national origin myth). If they were British they'd be waving Excalibur. If German, they'd be blathering about the volk. Really it's blood and soil mythology and the animating spirit of an incipient fascism and should be called out for what it is.

In any case, Von Brunn was a fan.

[Michael Ejercito]

Let's face it, lots of people will climb all over this guy because in reality the neo-nazis are pretty lame. You don't have to worry about them too much.

I have read messages posted by neo-Nazis on Usenet.

Von Brunn probably held these views for many years, but only now did he act on it, setting an example. He was a "lone wolf" per terrorism parlance. But I can't help but think this is part of a larger pattern of anti-Semitic violence and rhetoric. I think many people, a lot more people than most of us probably realize, are using Jews as a scapegoat for their problems.

Jeff Jacoby wrote about history's oldest hatred .

[kwais]

Where is UnderZog?

[libertymike]

Robert Kelly-

Crackpot, perhaps.

Fascist? Yeah, if you want to call one who supports the abolition of the income tax, the abolition of the drug war, the abolition of immunity for public officials and the abolition of the military industrial/national security/surveillance state, a fascist, go ahead.

Brilliant.

[Colin]

My favorite anecdote about Wagner's antisemitism is when Nietzsche, just to fuck with him, put some Brahms' sheet music on Wagner's piano.

Wagner went epileptic -- screaming at Nietzsche for putting that Jew's music on his piano.

What's funny about this was that Brahms wasn't even Jewish -- Wagner just thought he was.

[John]

"After all the OUTRAGE by the right based on an accurate and eerily prescient DHS report, we have had 2 shootings by extremist right wing nut jobs in the last 2 weeks."

I love how lefites like Tom have spent the last 8 years telling anyone and every one that 9-11 is not worth so much as changing a law over. Now some crazy coot shoots a single armed guard at a museum and he is ready to declare a police state and lock everyone who questions the Obama up. Fuck you Tom. No really Fuck you.

[Jesse Walker]

Wait. Back up. Did Lonewacko just acknowledge that guilt by association is a logical fallacy?

[kwais]

Robert Kelly,

You call LibertyMike a fascist, (and don't really explain why)

And then you seem to condone US Government oppression of political dissent, based on their ideas alone.

BTW, speaking of Anti-Semitism, before all this came out today, I was just hearing about a comment made by reverend Write, about Obama not being able to speak the truth because of the Jews.

Odd.

I was expecting that to be the main headline of the day.

[John]

This clown was a truther, a Nazi and a Obama birther. How long before every reasonable person, left and right admits that it is all just one sick swamp on the extreme of the Left and Right. There is really no telling them a part or holding the reasonable elements of either side responsible for them. Pro life people are not responsible for nuts like Eric Rudoph. Environmentalists are not responsible for the unibomber. And lefty anti Isreal types are not responsible for this clown.

Lets not give in to people like Chicago Tom's authoritarian paranoid instincts.

[John]

"But: Support for Ron Paul is not a sign of anything by itself except support for Ron Paul, however, it is one of numerous signs that this person may be an extremist. It's simple intelligence work."

No its not. It is called spying on Americans for exercising their 1st Amendment Rights. Being against the war in Iraq is not by itself a sing of anything. But it is one of the numerous signs tha this person may be an extremist. How does that sound jackass? It is just simple intelligence work, you authoritarian fuck.

[Elemenope]

LMNOP, I think your comment says something interesting about our society. People can actually do all kinds of reprehensible things, and we'll forgive them. But, if somebody has racist ideas, even if they never ever act on them, then that's just too much.

I dunno. Racism's pretty bad, but I'm with Sean on this one. Wagner's other character flaws seem to be what caused all of his really bad actions. In that context, his anti-semitism really was "beside the point."

I was reacting to this:

"That guy wasn't an anti-semite so much as he was just generally certifiable."

Which is literally untrue. He *was* an antisemite. He also happened to be generally certifiable. And his antisemitism was directly related to at least one great social rupture in his life (that between him and Nietzsche), so it isn't "beside the point".

It's one thing to say that in the context of his total crazy his antisemitism "isn't a big deal" and it's another thing entirely to claim that he was wasn't one. Which is what you did.

[alan]

Between MNG and Lonewacko, why is MM the go to Reason staffer to fuck with?

You got crazy magnetism, man.

[Mr. Chartreuse]

I really don't understand how you can say that a group that is anti-militarist, anti-imperialist, anti-police state, anti-corporatist, & for the decentralization of government, carries with it "incipient fascism", when those ideas don't meet the usual definitions of fascism.

I also don't know where you're getting the "hypernationalism" from either, as at least in comparison to the Fascist version of natonalism I doubt most people who support Ron Paul would put the nation before the individual.

[phalkor]

Now some crazy coot shoots a single armed guard at a museum and he is ready to declare a police state and lock everyone who questions the Obama up.

Well that is the well-reasoned approach, isn't it?

Crazy isn't illegal and I will fight to defend the rights of us crazy people to say what they want about who they want in private and public. Still being certifiably crazy does not excuse harming anyone. If only crazy people could learn the difference between a real danger and schizo-paranoiac illusion.

This crazy killer does not represent you or anyone else. There are no assemblies of crazy folk organizing and advocating this sort of attack. To infringe on the rights of everyone to pursue the tiny handful of crazies among us is a different and equally horrifying type of crazy.

[alan]

how come no one advocates water boarding Right-Wing Christian terrorists?

Maybe because you thought it up first. I'll put in on the to do list. Water board Right wing Christian terrorist. There. All set. Thanks a million.

[kwais]

This clown was a truther, a Nazi and a Obama birther. How long before every reasonable person, left and right admits that it is all just one sick swamp on the extreme of the Left and Right.

My theory on this is that conspiracy theories are the inevitable result of non open, deceitful government practices. And also the result of government policies favoring one group over another.

[alan]

After all the OUTRAGE by the right based on an accurate and eerily prescient DHS report, we have had 2 shootings by extremist right wing nut jobs in the last 2 weeks.

Good gawd. This is a lame and cheap attempt to lump libertarians in with a killer. If we object to the point you are making about the DHS report we must also be defending anti-Semites and terrorist. Whatever doubts I had about you being a hack are out the window for good.

[barry youngerman]

Wagner's "general craziness" left no impact the moment he was gone. His explicit, racial anti-Semitic writings lived on, and strongly influenced Hitler and other Nazis.
The Wagner family warmly supported Hitler, who loved Wagner music and used it in his own propaganda. It was played in the death camps.

I don't know if the term is relevant to the current shooting or to the murderer. However, it seems silly to try to "defend" the Wagner name against the charge of anti-Semitism.

But didn't the DHS report talk about the danger that soldiers returning from Iraq would commit violent extremist acts? Wasn't that the most controversial part? Looks pretty stupid in light of the actual murderers in the recent cases. Eg: an 89 year old German Nazi. Even sane people don't change their minds at 89.

[Sean W. Malone]

Exactly where did I say that Wagner wasn't an Anti-semite? I believe I've explained myself perfectly well... and one would think, not to be a dick, that my goddamn masters in music would have some bearing. Thanks for missing the point LMNOP.

[Sean W. Malone]

I wasn't saying that he was NOT one, just that his anti-semitism had more to do with his overall craziness, I thought that was clear. And again, within the context of the times, being an anti-semite is hardly an interesting character trait.

[Seward]

OT:

I really hope that we get some blog posts about this: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/31190909/

[shrike]

Exactly where did I say that Wagner wasn't an Anti-semite? I believe I've explained myself perfectly well... and one would think, not to be a dick, that my goddamn masters in music would have some bearing. Thanks for missing the point LMNOP.

Masters in music?

I like Wagner but Mahler was far superior. Did the Third Reich ban Mahler or Mendelssohn?

[Elemenope]

I wasn't saying that he was NOT one, just that his anti-semitism had more to do with his overall craziness, I thought that was clear.

Ahh. I got it now. Sorry about that. I was misinterpreting your original comment. I was taking umbrage with what I thought was you claiming he wasn't an antisemite. If you weren't claiming that, then we're pretty much on the same page.

What's bugging me about the whole thing is why Moynihan brought up Wagner in the first place; it doesn't seem to connect with or be apropos of anything related to this octogenarian psychopath murderer who shot up the Holocaust Museum. I mean, did the guy listen to Der Ring des Nibelungen or Parsifal in his fucking off hours?

[phalkor]

that's good stuff Seward. 2.5billion used to be a lot of spending.

[HeadTater]

I was certain that this event would explode into a gun debate, not a debate on the connection between conservatives (including libertarians) and nut jobs like this geriatric neo-nazi. After all, this happened not long after the ruling of Heller v DC. But, this guy was a convicted felon and would be breaking the law by owning the gun regardless of DC law.

[shrike]

"Wagnerian" could mean grand or massive.

Ok - maybe.

[daisycat]

Wagner himself was certainly anti-Semitic, but perhaps more importantly, the Nazis took up his views regarding both Jews and the mythic origins of "Germania." His influence on Nazi ideas and culture was profound.

[Sean W. Malone]

Yes, Shrike. And Mahler and Wagner are really different breeds of thing, I would say. Unless he wrote some 16 hour epic operas I'm not aware of 😛

And LMNOP, cool.

It's always been a little annoying to me to see Wagner equated with the Hitler crowd cause, for one thing, I like Wagner. But also, because he was so clearly just a product of his time on that issue and he had a bunch of Jewish friends even - which is really just a great demonstration that Wagner's internal beliefs were completely and utterly contradictory. All that fits way more into him just being kinda nuts and remarkably mentally unstable.

But you really can't blame Wagner for Hitler any more than you can blame J.D. Salinger for Mark Chapman or John Hinckley Jr. Psychoaths, dictators, murderers and other unsavory types will always happily accept any information that "supports" their authority. By Wagner or anyone else (see below).

As I said - who wasn't an anti-semite in mid/late 1800s Germany?? People wrote ridiculous screeds all the time about that kind of thing.

"Wagner's writings on race and his antisemitism[21] reflected some trends of thought in Germany during the 19th century. Houston Stewart Chamberlain, expanded on Gobineau's and Wagner's ideas in his 1899 book The Foundations of the Nineteenth Century, a work proclaiming the superiority of Aryan races, which had a wide circulation and later became required reading for members of the Nazi party. Chamberlain greatly admired Wagner's work and married Wagner's daughter, Eva, becoming a central part of the Bayreuth Circle, and thus contributing to the association of Wagner's name and works with racism and anti-semitism.

Adolf Hitler was an admirer of Wagner's music and anti-Jewish sentiments and saw in Wagner's operas an embodiment of his own vision of the German nation. There continues to be debate about the extent to which Wagner's views might have influenced Nazi thinking. As with the works of Nietzsche, the Nazis used those parts of Wagner's thought that were useful for propaganda and ignored or suppressed the rest. For example Joseph Goebbels banned Parsifal in 1939, shortly before the outbreak of the Second World War, due to the perceived pacifistic overtones of the opera.[22] Although Hitler himself was obsessed by "the Master," many in the Nazi hierarchy were not and, according to the historian Richard Carr, deeply resented the prospect of attending these lengthy epics at Hitler's insistence.[23]"

Wagner has all the halmarks of crazy-old-man syndrome which just capped off a life of being one of the world's first megalomaniacal auteurs.

Annnnnnyway, I really didn't mean for this bit to go on this long. Wagner really has no bearing on this jerk who killed the security guard. And the real story here is the discussion about police states that ChicagoTom brought up.

[IceTrey]

Shouldn't he be called anti Caucasian since everyone knows modern Jews aren't Semites but Khazars from the Black Sea region?

[Robert Kelly]

It is called spying on Americans for exercising their 1st Amendment Rights. Being against the war in Iraq is not by itself a sing of anything. But it is one of the numerous signs tha this person may be an extremist. How does that sound jackass? It is just simple intelligence work, you authoritarian fuck.

Listen, I never condoned it, I just gave my reason why (I think) the feds would factor in political support for Paul as one factor among many other factors in analysis of potential domestic terrorists. I didn't say I agree with it, and I made it clear that the analysis might have too broadly characterized Paul supporters as extremists, which is not an accurate assessment.

I really don't understand how you can say that a group that is anti-militarist, anti-imperialist, anti-police state, anti-corporatist, & for the decentralization of government, carries with it "incipient fascism", when those ideas don't meet the usual definitions of fascism.

I also don't know where you're getting the "hypernationalism" from either, as at least in comparison to the Fascist version of natonalism I doubt most people who support Ron Paul would put the nation before the individual.

My co-blogger and I have written about this here, here, here and here.

Fascism is the extremism not of the left or right, but of the center. As G.M. Tamas has noted: "Fascism had very little to do with pass?iste feudal, aristocratic, monarchist ideas, was on the whole anti-clerical, opposed communism and socialist revolution, and--like the liberals whose electorate it had inherited--hated big business, trade unions, and the social welfare state."

And I don't think it's very useful taking what they say for granted. Yes, Paul is "anti-militarist" but he's perfectly fine with sending the military to the border to enforce immigration laws, or repealing the 14th Amendment so we don't have to grant citizenship to children of immigrants. So he's in favor of decentralizing the government, so what? The British National Party claims to want to reduce government "to the lowest possible level" and they're an outright white supremacist and fascist organization. And so Paul is antiwar, so what? So was Charles Coughlin and America First. I mean, they are nationalists. Central to their world view is that the nation is being undermined within by international organizations, the United Nations, etc. I should remind you that Paul did not endorse the libertarian candidate Bob Barr in 2008, but the Constitution Party, that, while we're looking at Wikipedia, is listed as a "Christian Nationalist" party.

To be perfectly honest, what they say is of little interest to me insofar as it can be studied as part of the movement's image and rhetoric. What the Paul movement represents is a "revolutionary" short bus filled with would-be reincarnations of some mythologized origin of the pure nation -- the patriot and militia movement waving continental flags. If they were Germans they'd be prancing around in viking costume or going on about the German race. But we're Americans so our fascist movement finds alternative forms of myth-making with the exception of geriatric Prussians like von Brunn, who go the distance.

Anyways, I don't want to mischaracterize Paul supporters across the board. It's a broad group. What I'm referring to is the "patriot movement" and Paul specifically. I think Hit & Run is one of the finest political blogs on the net. But getting in bed with these folks is a major error.

[Kim Luisi]

John you wrote:
No its not. It is called spying on Americans for exercising their 1st Amendment Rights. Being against the war in Iraq is not by itself a sing of anything. But it is one of the numerous signs tha this person may be an extremist. How does that sound jackass? It is just simple intelligence work, you authoritarian fuck.

I have to tell you, as soon as I found out about this tragedy, I thought immediately of that recent action by DHS lumping in libertarians with extremists, etc.

Moynihan mentions it rather flippantly in his piece, but if people are talking about spying on right-wing groups, they're also talking about spying on libertarians. They don't seem to be able to negotiate the difference between someone who is anti-government and who will commit violence and someone who is simply anti-government.

I have an anti-government bumper sticker on my car. I guess this is cause for suspicion.

[John C. Randolph]

Reasons to hate Wagner:

1) his music
2) his anti-semtisim
3) his music
4) his music.

-jcr

[John C. Randolph]

I love how lefites like Tom have spent the last 8 years telling anyone and every one that 9-11 is not worth so much as changing a law over.

There wasn't any reason to change laws over 9-11. What those perps did was already illegal.

It's just like Sarbanes-Oxley as a reaction to Enron. Fraud was already a crime.

-jcr

[24AheadDotCom]

jayjayhawker: I didn't realize I owed you answers; if I missed a previous comment from you asking me questions perhaps it's because I rarely bother reading the comments here. For that I apologize completely.

As for your questions, what makes you think I support freedom? Unlike Reason's other commenters, I'm not a 14-year-old comic book fan. I realize there are limits to freedom. And, I realize that for the good of the country one of those is avoiding electing those who might have DividedLoyalties. That's just good old plain American common sense. I realize that's a foreign topic to libertarians, but do your best to understand.

As for the rest, you obviously have no clue about my argument. Maybe you could find someone smarter than you to read my argument to you. Hint: the most patient elementary school students are Quakers. Try and find one of them.

[Richard Hoste]

Hey, did you hear the one about the black Muslim who shot up the army base?

HBD Books

[Kim Luisi]

24AHead:

If you want to be taken seriously, at a minimum your website should look serious. Without even reading much of the content it just screams "I'M A PARANOID CONSPIRACY THEORIST" to me. Not saying you are, but the look of your website looks like you are.

[Rex Rhino]

Robert Kelly:

Democrats hate Ron Paul because they worried about him splitting the anti-Bush vote. They realize that the only thing they usually have going for themselves is that they are not Republicans.

Ron Paul was extremely popular with the left-wing anti-war campus crowd. So the Democratic Party propaganda machine created the FUD smear campaign you are now repeating.

If you look at the Democratic Party, and their rhetoric, favored policy, etc., they are somewhere to the far right of Ron Paul on virtually all issues except for the welfare state (and the welfare state is as important a part of fascist as socialism).

[publius]

"should I now associate Sousa marches with the imprisonment of Japanese people?"

Certainly. I always have

[hmm]

I'm 14 and half god damnit!!

[Shawn]

Sorry, Wagner's music was not piped in to the death camps. That's a common misconception. And the Nazi rank-and-file were not generally mad for Wagner. They listened to much more straightforward brass-band music.

He was a bad person and an anti-Semite. But his anti-Semitism was not of some special flavor that warrants naming it after him as MM does.

[Jesse Walker]

jayjayhawker: I didn't realize I owed you answers; if I missed a previous comment from you asking me questions perhaps it's because I rarely bother reading the comments here.

As long as you're acknowledging questions that you've been ignoring, maybe you could finally give us your replies to these?

[FreddieFeelGood]

Shouldn't we all be concerned with doddering fascists carrying shotguns? And how the hell was an 89 year old able to even carry a shotgun, much less shoot one? At least he didn't have an "automatic weapon".

[jayjayhawker]

24AheadDotCom,
"jayjayhawker: I didn't realize I owed you answers;"

You are advocating a position. I am asking you questions about it. To me it is not a matter of "owing" me anything.

"I realize there are limits to freedom. And, I realize that for the good of the country one of those is avoiding electing those who might have DividedLoyalties."

K, but why in this specific case should I be prevented from voting for who I want? Is Obama an agent of another country?

Please note: I think Obama is a shitty President, but if you are going to argue about "DividedLoyalites" then you better have some specific evidence that his loyalty is divided.
Also, if loyalty is the issue, how does someone being technically a USA citizen prevent "DividedLoyalites?"

Your argument seems to consist largely of technicalities (and very tenuous ones at that), and then someone calls you on this it becomes a "DividedLoyalites" issue.

Also
"As for the rest, you obviously have no clue about my argument. Maybe you could find someone smarter than you to read my argument to you. Hint: the most patient elementary school students are Quakers."

Ummm...none of these answered my questions. Assuming that the majority of your points are correct it answers none of my questions.

I also found you position problematic because let us say you are correct and Obama can no longer be President...what then? Does McCain get it? You are aware he was born in Panama right? So according to your own logic how does McCain magically become eligible to be President?

[JohnGalt300]

Robert Kelly: You make some good points about the general Ron Paul movement. A major caveat however, is the overall diversity. While there is certainly a group that very much reflects what you are talking about, the truth is that support for Paul comes from very broad quarters. I myself saw it principally as a movement that was gaining some popularity that at its base had at least some anarchist principles. I don't agree with Paul on everything, and I think the movement was more dvierse during the campaign, but you are broadly categorizing a large group of people. Especially Adam Kokesh, whom I have met and know of through friends. He is very much a libertarian anarchist. He has nothing to do with the groups you describe (in fact when he spoke to us he sent some time mocking the constituion party and Baldwin.) He certainly has a "militant" tone, but that is his rhetorical style and his personality. His principle ethic is non-violence, and if you listen to all of what he had to say, you would see he makes that quite evident.

[dfd]

Not saying you are, but the look of your website looks like you are.

He is.

[Jordan]

Speaking of joos, apparently they're targetting Rev. Wright now. It turns out that Obama's spiritual mentor really was a complete nutjob.

Wright told the Daily Press he had not talked with Obama since he entered the White House.

"Them Jews aren't going to let him talk to me. I told my baby daughter, that he'll talk to me in five years when he's a lame duck, or in eight years when he's out of office," Wright was quoted as saying in an article posted Wednesday.

"They will not let him to talk to somebody who calls a spade what it is. ... I said from the beginning: He's a politician; I'm a pastor. He's got to do what politicians do," he said.

[Artavazd Papazian Odadjian-Gor]

Well, people have pointed this out already, but 1)von Brunn is arrested 2)underzog and H.H. Wolff don't show up.

Draw your own conclusions.

On a more serious note, Lonewacko responded to somebody. Good job, LW! Progress!

[Artavazd Papazian Odadjian-Gor]

Jordan,

When I start to go insane, I want paranoia more original than just "the j00s".

[Fluffy]

I mean, the ongoing "rEVOLution" is hardly libertarian. It's more hypernationalist anti-immigrant loathing, flag waving middle-class resentment. A lot of these folks think they're carrying on the rebirth of the Founding Fathers (our national origin myth). If they were British they'd be waving Excalibur.

This is absolute nonsense.

Perhaps you were too busy "studying image and rhetoric" to do simple things like actually listen to the fucking words spoken at the GOP primary debates, but Paul's immigration position [one I don't share, being an open borders man myself] was the vanilla mainstream GOP position in 2008, and was certainly more mild than that voiced by Tancredo, and even Romney. Strictly speaking, Paul was and is always careful to specify that he favors restricting immigration because of the presence of the welfare state. Since the necessary implication of that is that he would not favor restricting immigration if the welfare state were eliminated, it's pretty clear this is just another instance of Paul finding a way to support a libertarian position in a twisted manner that his Texas consituency can return him to Congress to support. If there was an anti-immigrant element to Paul's supporters, it was no larger than that of any other GOP candidate and it was dwarfed - I mean absolutely crushed, by several orders of magnitude - by anti-war-on-terror, anti-Patriot Act Bush haters, and by goldbugs.

I also have to point out that your "Excalibur" nonsense reveals nothing so much as your own hatred and withering contempt for the revolutionary principles that went into the founding of the United States. You may not realize this, but the members of the revolutionary generation weren't Arthurian myths - they were real human beings whose lives are actually fantastically well documented, and we are still governed by the Constitution they wrote and the institutions they created. That means that if someone holds up a "Don't Tread on Me" flag at a Ron Paul rally in 2008, it probably represents their attempt to articulate a love of liberty, or an admiration of the principles the founding generation wrote down [and then failed to live by], and has basically nothing in common with putting on a fucking Viking helmet and dancing around Bayreuth.

[Sean W. Malone]

Fluffy shoots... he scores.

As much as I ever consider myself a part of any group, I'd say I belong somewhat to the rEVOLution crowd. I suspect many of us around here do to one extent or another. The idea that Ron Paul is an anti-immigrant movement is patently laughable.

Anecdotally speaking - the one anti-immigration ad Ron Paul's campaign put out was incredibly poorly received by everyone I ever met who was a supporter of his. It was a silly pander to his Texas constituents that I for one couldn't completely even understand, but there was certainly no rallying cry around that issue of all things.

Besides, when RP goes to speak, what's he talking about time and time again? The Federal Reserve, the gold standard, liberty..... Usually it goes something like this.

[IceTrey]

jayjayhawker,

When Obama is declared ineligible Biden becomes POTUS.

[jayjayhawker]

"When Obama is declared ineligible Biden becomes POTUS."

Well, yea, I kind of assumed that. However, LoneWacko's position (and other bithers) have varied.

Leading up to the actual commencement of Obama many of them contended that if Obama is declared not to be a citizen then the election of him (and Biden) is invalid and McCain (since he came in second) should win.

I agree, that logically Biden would be the choice, but I am trying to get a grasp on LoneWacko's position on the subject.

[Elemenope]

I am trying to get a grasp on LoneWacko's position on the subject.

You're gonna hurt yourself in an irreparable way if you keep trying to do that. The guy is a Gordian knot of the temporal lobe: just cut through that shit and go have a beer. It'll save you the headache.

[..]

When Obama is declared ineligible Biden becomes POTUS

What's wrong with saying "president"? Too many letters?

[Xeones]

What's wrong with saying "president"? Too many letters?

Because "President Biden" is one of the most terrifying phrases in the English language.

[PR]

ChicagoTom, I'm having trouble scoring this one. Neonazis are Neocons now?

[Citizen Nothing]

On NPR this morning the reporter mentioned that the shooter had "once lived in Idaho."
I think that explains everything.

[R C Dean]

I just gave my reason why (I think) the feds would factor in political support for Paul as one factor among many other factors in analysis of potential domestic terrorists.

If they're idiots, they would. It has such low utility as a predictor of terrorist activity that it would junk up their analysis to do so.

[Tony]

also have to point out that your "Excalibur" nonsense reveals nothing so much as your own hatred and withering contempt for the revolutionary principles that went into the founding of the United States. You may not realize this, but the members of the revolutionary generation weren't Arthurian myths - they were real human beings whose lives are actually fantastically well documented, and we are still governed by the Constitution they wrote and the institutions they created.

I don't think recognizing that, yes, America too has national origin fables is the same as having contempt for revolutionary or American founding principles. The point isn't how factual the myths are but whether they're idealized to an extent that deviating from (what is said to be) the wishes of the Great Founders is considered heresy. Even the most pragmatic and liberal governing philosophies are prone to romanticizing. I mean how often is American exceptionalism excused because of the supposedly uniquely enlightened circumstances of our founding? I think if we tallied the bodies stacked up in our history we'd not fare much better morally than any other major power.

[Seamus]

Because "President Biden" is one of the most terrifying phrases in the English language.

Not really. President Biden would be too stupid to get anything accomplished (and watching him try to govern would be as much fun as watching Colbert 24/7). Unfortunately, you can't say that about Obama.

[Gimlet]

"I rarely bother reading the comments here. For that I apologize completely.

You don't read us and we don't read you.

So why are you even here?

[Gimlet]

@ Tony the I don't supply links guy,

No links, no chat.

[Greg]

Only 186 homicides in a year. Where I am from that would be considered peace and tranquility.

New Orleans native here. The town that billions of post Katrina Federal dollars could not fix, although the press releases say those dollars prevented a local recession.

Newsflash for the media. New Orleans has been in a recession since the late 1960s.

[Fluffy]

I don't think recognizing that, yes, America too has national origin fables is the same as having contempt for revolutionary or American founding principles.

Expressed in Robert Kelly's manner, yes it does.

It's one thing for us to sit around and discuss the personal and political failings of the men who made the American Revolution. We do that all the time. They killed Indians and owned slaves and denied the poor and women the vote. Hell, I have had quite heated discussions with people here when I advanced the argument that if slaves had risen up to slaughter Washington and Jefferson they would have been morally in the right. So I certainly don't idealize the revolutionary generation to the point where I can't recognize their flaws and am somehow unaware of the myriad ways in which they failed to live up to the ideals they gave uniquely eloquent voice to.

But Kelly isn't saying "Let's inform ourselves about our history to the best of our ability and keep some perspective on it." Kelly is saying, "I can immediately tell if someone speaks too stridently about the Constitution or about the Founders, or if they utilize revolutionary war imagery or rhetoric, that the person is an incipient fascist and a retard who rides the short bus. Because we all know that no one could ever actually engage the absurd and outdated ideas of the revolution seriously, and we all know that anyone who does so is cracked in the head and tremendously unsophisticated and out of touch with current political dialogue, so they must be crackpots who hate minorities and aspire to purify the nation using the American equivalent of the Arthur myths or the Ring cycle." That's what he's saying, and everyone here knows I'm characterizing him accurately.

[libertymike]

Fluffy, include me in the "everyone here knows I'm characterizing him accurately" group.

Look, he called me a fascist on the basis of my 9:06 pm post. Go figure.

[Moynitarian Overlord]

The brilliant DHS reports gave us a warning that has been ignored once too often! Ever since this scary "Ron Paul reLOVEution" got started it has been mainly a movement that was intended to coordinate with Al Qaeda extremist. Now we see that the tree is starting to bear wack fruit and it will be the job of the fed to chop down the extremist trees that are bearing the poisonous fruit. The threat to the republic is great and we need to IMMEDIATELY act to fight this scourge of nutjobs. Whatever it takes, torture, secret prisons...This is war, we cannot let ACLU pansies lose this war or the country will be destroyed.

[TrickyVic]

"""No its not. It is called spying on Americans for exercising their 1st Amendment Rights."""

John, it's not called spying anymore, it's domestic geospatial intelligence. We don't "spy" on our citizens. Bush repeatedly said so.

[LarryA]

I was certain that this event would explode into a gun debate, not a debate on the connection between conservatives (including libertarians) and nut jobs like this geriatric neo-nazi.

I was also pleasantly surprised that it didn't. However, the anti-gun folks have gotten leery about their "See! Gun=Violence!" diatribes where we can respond, "Yet another shooting in a 'gun-free zone.'"

BTW, the Kansas shooting was also in a "gun-free zone" as that state prohibits concealed carry in "any church or temple."

And how the hell was an 89 year old able to even carry a shotgun, much less shoot one?

Not that hard. A couple of years back I interviewed someone who at 87 had just won a skeet tournament trophy.

How he got it into D.C. is a good question, though. They have laws.

[Brandybuck]

I don't consider myself a rEVOLutionist, because my libertarian creds predated the 2008 campaign by twenty five years. Hell, I walked for Ron Paul in 1988!!! But because I don't have a C4L bumper sticker on my car, a certain subset of the rEVOLution consider me to be a traitor. I'm not a member of their personality cult, and thus am an apostate.

[Mr. Chartreuse]

And I don't think it's very useful taking what they say for granted. Yes, Paul is "anti-militarist" but he's perfectly fine with sending the military to the border to enforce immigration laws, or repealing the 14th Amendment so we don't have to grant citizenship to children of immigrants.

I don't agree with Paul on immigration, but I believe Fluffy has adequately explained the reasoning behind Paul's position. I will say that if I had to choose between the US's current system of $1 trillion yearly on defense related spending and controlling an empire versus a greatly reduced defense budget, which would then lead to the military patrolling the border (which honestly would be a legitimate function of any army), instead of overthrowing governments or finding other kinds of dragons to slay, I would choose the latter.

So he's in favor of decentralizing the government, so what? The British National Party claims to want to reduce government "to the lowest possible level" and they're an outright white supremacist and fascist organization.

IIRC, fascist governments end up taking power away from the states/provinces/regions in order to get more power and to build "national unity." The BNP may want to do that, but they are also in favor of giving police carte blanche to crack skulls, in favor of nationalization of companies, and increased social and health spending, all things that lead to bigger and not so decentralized government.

And so Paul is antiwar, so what? So was Charles Coughlin and America First. I mean, they are nationalists. Central to their world view is that the nation is being undermined within by international organizations, the United Nations, etc

Except that American First didn't want to be a part of any war and weren't using a call for national unity to invade Poland. I also don't see how United Nation is bad=the hypernationalism of incipient fascism. There's a difference between the "Ein Volk, Ein Reich" kind of nationalism and the idea that sovereignty shouldn't be undermined by an outside force and we shouldn't get involved in other people's messes.

I should remind you that Paul did not endorse the libertarian candidate Bob Barr in 2008, but the Constitution Party, that, while we're looking at Wikipedia, is listed as a "Christian Nationalist" party.

While Paul considered both Barr and Baldwin to be friends, I believe he made the decision after Barr snubbed Paul at an event and wrote a letter to Paul saying that he should his running mate.

[Jon von Briesen]

Hey, Mick,

Lay off us Prussian Junkers, would you. You'll get us on some profiling list of DHS and TSA. "[Von] Brunn" could be from any non-Prussian German-speaking area. Furthermore, the "von" does not necessarily convey noble heritage. There are many families, with no pretense to nobility, who have a "von" in their name, indicating place of origin.

I.e., "von Brunn" may be neither "Prussian" nor "Junker." I don't know about this particular case.