Is Ron Paul going to have anything to say about this latest incident by his brown shirts?

The assault picked up after lunch. Paul supporters phoning Call claimed to be from the media. Others just yelled, saying she had committed treason, fraud. One person said she should be shot. She received as many as 40 calls that day.

“One person said he was on a nationally syndicated radio station,” Call said, “and he has given out my phone number and they need to call the town of Sutton to find out why there’s voter fraud.”

The voices came from everywhere. California. Ohio. Florida. Michigan. Very few were from New Hampshire.

He can say that he has no control over his supporters all he wants, but as long as he continues fail to to do a Sister Souljah and denounce this kind of thing, we will continue to conclude that money and political support is more important to him than integrity.

A leading proponent of action against global warming says that many of his “green” “allies” are hurting the cause:

He says: “There is a suspicion, and I have that suspicion myself, that a large number of people who label themselves ‘green’ are actually keen to take us back to the 18th or even the 17th century.”

He characterises their argument as “let’s get away from all the technological gizmos and developments of the 20th century”.

“People say ‘well, we’ll just use less energy.’ Come on,” he says. “And then there’s the real world, where everyone is aspiring to the sort of standard of living that we have, which is based on a large energy consumption.”

King calls global warming the biggest challenge our civilisation has ever faced, and famously, in a 2004 article in the journal Science, berated the US for its inaction, describing climate change as “more serious even than the threat of terrorism”. But his vocal support for nuclear power and genetically modified foods has led to tensions with environmental campaigners.

No kidding.

They’re called “watermelons”–green on the outside, red on the inside. Socialism lost its luster with the fall of the Soviet Union, so they’re simply latching on to this latest ideological fad to try to keep it going under a different name.

One would have thought that Canada wouldn’t have needed such, but apparently it does, in the form of Ezra Levant.

I wouldn’t call it a kangaroo court. Given the locale, more like a moose court. Here’s his opening statement. Here is the transcript. Read it and weep (for different reasons, depending on whether you are a proponent, or opponent, of freedom of expression).

I am here at this government interrogation under protest. It is my position that the government has no legal or moral authority to interrogate me or anyone else for publishing these words and pictures. That is a violation of my ancient and inalienable freedoms: freedom of speech, freedom of the press, and in this case, religious freedom and the separation of mosque and state. It is especially perverted that a bureaucracy calling itself the Alberta human rights commission would be the government agency violating my human rights. So I will now call those bureaucrats

For those who can’t get enough of Fred Thompson, here’s the blog for you.

…different flakes. I’m assuming that the exclusion of Fred Thompson (who just got an endorsement from Human Events this morning) was deliberate.

I wonder how much the endorsement will help? I’m sure that it won’t hurt, but (though I’m not a regular reader) I suspect that most people who read Human Events in South Carolina were probably going to vote for him anyway.

[Update late morning]

Here’s an interesting analysis of why Thompson focused on Huckabee last night, and didn’t go after McCain. Hint: it’s not because he’s trying to help McCain win the nomination.

Meanwhile, Matt Welch, incoming editor of Reason, is making up for lost time in dissecting Dr. No’s past.

[Update mid afternoon]

It just occurs to me that we’ll know whether or not Krumm’s Thompson/McCain theory is valid after the Michigan primary. If he starts to go after McCain in addition to Huckabee after the primary, and before South Carolina, then it will all make sense.

…with which I wholeheartedly agree, from Lileks:

On the Hewitt show tonight I was talking about the end result of the administration

Talk about optimal ad placement.

The ad may have changed by the time you view the AP story (hmmm…checking after posting this…yup, it has), but that was what was there when I grabbed the screen shot. I did not photoshop it, I swear.

And RIP, Sir Edmund. I’m sure that there will be more tears from Hill over the person for whom she was named.

Whatever else you think of Ron Paul, it is entertaining to hear the phrase “Austrian theory of the business cycle” in a Republican debate (though it almost sounded like he said “Australian”–“tie me von Mises down, boys…”?)

[Update at 9:26]

Fred takes off the gloves and finally goes after Huckabee for his NEA endorsement and opposition to vouchers. “That’s not the position of the Reagan coalition. That’s the position of the Democratic Party.”

Huckabee’s response (paraphrased) boils down to, “well, people reelected me.”

Pretty weak tea to make your credentials as a conservative. Lots of Democrats, even very “liberal” ones, get reelected. Fred’s job is to draw a distinction between himself and the Huckster as the only true conservative in South Carolina, and so far, I think he’s doing well. We’ll see if he hits him again.

[Update at 9:42]

Ron Paul is really coming off as the crazy uncle at the holiday dinner, ranting about things that aren’t even relevant to the question. Brit Hume: “Congressman, all your fellow candidates agreed with the passive response to the Iranian provocation. Who or what are you responding to?”

[Update afterward]

A memorable phrase from the consensus winner tonight, Fred Thompson, on immigration: “High fences and wide gates.”

If anyone is inspired by his performance to send him some money in the wake of his performance, he’s looking for it.

Rick Moran is organizing a blogburst for Fred Thompson, who is putting all his chips on the South Carolina table. He makes a pretty good case as to why his chances may be good for a win there, but he needs money.

You’ve got to love these latest attacks on Jonah’s book:

Ezra…credits David Neiwert whose review is exactly the sort of shallow, cliche-ridden, attack-the-messenger stuff that I would expect Ezra to find so persuasive. More on that in a moment. But I find it hilarious that the part Ezra thought sufficiently profound to highlight was, in part, the bit where Neiwert insists that the fascist threat remains on the right and in particular that there’s a threat of “totalitarianism” from “dogmatic individualists.”

Apparently, to these people, words don’t mean things at all.

[Early evening update]

Jonah corrects the record, via an email by Niewert (and per a comment by Duncan Young in comments). Those were Ezra’s words, not his. The point remains.