The fellow was including in his definition a whole lot of long time conservatives. Get it? Neo? Long-time?
It's an incorrect, trite, and meaningless insult of people that you don't have the intellectual wherewithal to debate.
But thanks for the essay explaining what I didn't need to be told.
>>>
The fellow was including in his definition a whole lot of long time conservatives. Get it? Neo? Long-time?
<<<
What fellow? Was including what conservatives? In what definition? Do you mean where RightWingRadio says, "Neocons abound here." in post #30? By here I assume he means FR. Are you saying that there are not a lot of neocons (pro welfare/warfare state) on FreeRepublic?
I realize the rather pedantic point that neo means new. That is why I pointed out (in post #215) that neocons are neither new nor conservative. Neo means new I get it! No really, I do. Honestly!
>>>
It's an incorrect, trite, and meaningless insult of people that you don't have the intellectual wherewithal to debate.
<<<
Why is it an insult? A poor name perhaps (50 years on), but one that has stuck. Maybe we could call them paleoneocons to distinguish them from the "paleocons", but remind us that they too have been around along time.
Regarding "intellectual wherewithal", I have just enough to understand that the whole world does not have to agree with me, and I do not have to get bent out of shape when my ideas or "heroes" are criticized.