The Editors of the New Republic Call Ron Paul a "Pseudo-Libertarian"

The editors of The New Republic have this to say:

These days, the debates often resemble the audition round of "American Idol" where the talented and crazy alike vie for their 15 minutes of fame and maybe a little profit afterward. And, thus, debate time must be found for a specimen like Mike Gravel ("Who the hell are we going to nuke? Tell me, Barack. Barack, who do you want to nuke?"). Or Dennis Kucinich, who offers nothing he didn't say in his previous, totally futile candidacy (except his insinuation that instead of assassinating Osama bin Laden, we should try certain American leaders for war crimes). And maybe, before their inclusion in the next debate, Jim Gilmore and Duncan Hunter can explain just who, exactly, has asked to hear from them? (At least Ron Paul offers a distinctive pseudo-libertarian viewpoint.)

The New Republic has had a pretty amazing history.From supporting socialist Presidential candidates like Norman Thomas, to fascists like Mussolini, to pagans like Al Gore:what is it about small government The New Republic doesn't understand?