It’s get to the point that when I hear the word ‘neoconservative’ I just stop listening because I know its another conspiracy theory about how evil Bush and the Jews are and how America has changed its direction (yeah, we’ve never fought a war to keep people free before....).
Anybody debating neoconservatism (which is always debated from the left) is just looking for a justification because their ‘war for oil’ ‘revenge for daddy’ ‘occupying the Middle East’ ‘imperialist expansion’ motives were laughed at.
The funny part about that excuse is that an attempted assassination of a former president could considered an act of war.
All our problems are due to some kind of lib.
It's interesting that the author of this piece links the critique of "neoconservatism" to the Jeffersonian critique of Washingtonian/Hamiltonian federalism.
Interesting because, as you point out with the "palaeocon" vs. "neocon" debate, the Jeffersonian critique of Washington and Hamilton was also a left critique: Jefferson was the champion of the French Revolution (he later recanted these views in his age and even partially in his presidency, but the "hot period" of Jefferson vs. Washington/Adams/Hamilton was 1794-1804), and he was the champion of Rousseau's anthropology.
The Washington/Hamilton party were the conservatives in that debate and the Jeffersonians were the radicals.