[Thorin]

>>>>>>I invite you to find some examples where he mentions neo-cons that he criticizes any gentiles at all, or that the number of gentiles (who are more numerous in the movement and in government) he mentions out number the Jews he mentions.

This is his cover article for the American Conservative on the eve of the Iraq War: http://www.amconmag.com/2003/03_24_03/cover.html

In it, you will find a succinct definition of neoconservatism, and a listing of Jeane Kirkpatrick, Bill Bennett, Michael Novak, and James Q. Wilson as prominent neocons, and a definition of neocon journals as including National Review and the Wall Street Journal editorial page, neither of which are predominantly Jewish.

You will also find criticism of the foreign policy positions of Bill Bennett, Tom Donnelly, the Wall Street Journal editorial page, and Laurent Murawiec, a former La Rouchie turned neocon.

Buchanan defines neoconservatism as an ideological movement, not an ethnicity.

[Mamzelle]

I hope Bennett really doesn't belong on that list, but you might also add Biden to it.

It is interesting how the term "neo-con" is spun. Kristol calls himself a neoconservative, and has used the word as often as he has "hegemony", if that's possible. I recommend a long and depressing dogpile.com search using the two words, "Balkan" and "neoconservative." You'll find a lot of Kristol's academic papers: the stuff he got grants to write.

So Kristol can write about neoconservatism, but you're not allowed to say the word "neoconservative" on pain of being called an antisemite. And there are types anxious to remind you of your speech restrictions.

[sinkspur]

Buchanan defines neoconservatism as an ideological movement, not an ethnicity.

That's why he spends the first half of the article quoting nothing but Jewish pundits.