Glenn Jacobs said he is.
With few resources, Lew wants to expand LRC. He wants to make it more like a daily libertarian newspaper for the 21st century, covering culture and sports as well as economics, history, politics, and everything.
Disparage:
**1.**to speak of or treat slightingly; depreciate; belittle: Do not disparage good manners.
**2.**to bring reproach or discredit upon; lower the estimation of: Your behavior will disparage the whole family.
Reason: 1 a**:** a statement offered in explanation or justification <gave reason**s that were quite satisfactory> b**:** a rational ground or motive <a good reason to act soon> c**:** a sufficient ground of explanation or of logical defense ; especially : something (as a principle or law) that supports a conclusion or explains a fact <the reason**s behind her client’s action> d**:** the thing that makes some fact intelligible : cause <the reason for earthquakes> <the real reason why he wanted me to stay — Graham Greene>2 a (1): the power of comprehending, inferring, or thinking especially in orderly rational ways : intelligence (2): proper exercise of the mind (3): sanity b**:** the sum of the intellectual powers3archaic : treatment that affords satisfaction
If it makes little sense or not, it does not matter: you can disparage without reason. How? Simply by doing it on intuition or emotion I suppose. I would also think it is a fairly common act to disparage without reason, or at the very least, not so uncommon as to be irrelevant in life.
The nature of the sentence though, is meant to state that holding up reason to a level as to be the “one, true, and only way” and above and beyond all else is a silly notion. In this sense I was refering to my “cult of reason” stance in particular.
In reality though it was a joke sentence, as I took nirgrahamUK’s response to be a joke (at least I hope it was). The way I read him was, Emotion (the minor god Amor) does disparage Reason (the major god Apollo) in the myth. In a way nirgaham just echoed what I said and turned it around and took out the myth (if that was a joke, I found it very clever), I then used his sentence and turned that around without using the actual myth. If he was not joking, me using Ovid’s myth was kind of a joke with a point anyway, as I thought it as a highly appropriate subject and a useful illustration. I think using poetry/myths/stories/art can be a useful way in showing a point to certain people. I felt it doubly appropriate because it was a myth (and from a mock epic, to boot). There can be much truth in myth, indeed.
“What is truth?” Pontius Pilate. John 18:38
Yup. Jeffrey Tucker’s columns are great.
He’s not the only one.
I think Rothbard backed Pat Buchanan during his paleo-phase.
[…] and supported the presidential campaign of Pat Buchanan in 1992, saying “with Pat Buchanan as our leader, we shall break the clock of social democracy.” However, later he became disillusioned and said Buchanan developed too much faith in economic planning and centralized state power.
What I Learned From Paleoism by Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr.
http://www.lewrockwell.com/rockwell/paleoism.html