[BlackElk]

There is NOTHING vaguely CONSERVATIVE about the foreign policy of fear and cowardice that is paleo"conservatism." What you deride as "neo-cons" are the actual conservatives who believe in a dominant foreign policy, a military second to none and infinitely stronger than whatever comes next in line. When the paleopacifists ruled our foreign policy in the age of ubercoward Neville Chamberlin, Hitler and Tojo ran wild and we wound up foolishly allying with an equal or worse monster in Stalin.

Most people who believe in a manly foreign policy and military have no use for "cheap labor" much less tax cuts for the rich. If Coulter says otherwise, she is wrong.

I will vote for Trump but because he is a man's man and no paleocoward.

[Alberta's Child]

There is nothing remotely conservative about a foreign policy that sells U.S. military and intelligence assets to foreign interests. This has been the practice of this country for 25 years -- under Republican and Democratic administrations alike.

And there's nothing manly about U.S. soldiers getting sent to fight pointless military campaigns all over the globe in a stupid "war on terror" ... by a bunch of effeminate men who would convert to Islam before they even dreamed of putting on a military uniform themselves.

[EQAndyBuzz]

” What you deride as “neo-cons” are the actual conservatives who believe in a dominant foreign policy, a military second to none and infinitely stronger than whatever comes next in line.”

I wasn’t referring to any of this. I was referring strictly the war mongers who want war for wars sake. There are many in the GOP who share our views and those are the views of true conservatives.