Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

How Neo are the Neocons?
Los Angeles Times ^ | April 22, 2008 | Jonah Goldberg

Posted on 04/22/2008 1:02:24 PM PDT by moderatewolverine

From our earliest days, Americans have supported the promotion of democracy around the world, often by force and without undue heed to international institutions. William Henry Seward, a founder of the Republican Party and Lincoln's secretary of State, argued that it was America's mission to lead the way "to the universal restoration of power to the governed." A generation earlier, statesman Henry Clay championed the idea that America had the "duty to share with the rest of mankind this most precious gift" of liberty. Both world wars, Korea and Vietnam would be inconceivable without accounting for America's dedication to the promotion and defense of democracy.

Kagan traces such sentiments to the dawn of the republic. The founders, he writes, saw the U.S. as a " 'Hercules in a cradle' ... because its beliefs, which liberated human potential and made possible a transcendent greatness, would capture the imagination and the following of all humanity."

Even amid the 15-month riot of Bush-bashing during the Democratic Party's fratricidal primaries, both Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama conceded the core neoconservative principle of the Bush doctrine. "There's absolutely a connection between a democratic regime and heightened security for the United States," Clinton said, responding to events in Pakistan. And Obama would not only unilaterally attack Al Qaeda in Pakistan without Pakistan's permission if necessary, but he also argues that anti-Americanism in the Middle East is a direct consequence of the lack of democracy.

(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: foreignaffairs; neocon; neoconservatism; politics
It's incredible that some people shudder at this dirty word, yet have no clue what the hell it really means.
1 posted on 04/22/2008 1:02:24 PM PDT by moderatewolverine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: moderatewolverine
They're more con than neo.
2 posted on 04/22/2008 1:03:39 PM PDT by Ratblaster (HILLARY 08 Bring Back the Crooked Hillbillies)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: moderatewolverine

To learn about the first great Jewish leadership transformation of the NeoCons and how they helped build the Reagan Coalition, watch this great video from the New Centurion Program:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7vSEx623os8


3 posted on 04/22/2008 1:12:19 PM PDT by Neville Chamberlain (Obamalamadindong)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: moderatewolverine

The only other time I have heard “neo” used in a sentence it was followed by “Nazi” and since everyone knows conservatives are Nazi’s then it makes sense.


4 posted on 04/22/2008 1:16:56 PM PDT by YoungHickey ("Those who say it can't be done should not interupt those doing it.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: moderatewolverine

the neo cons have been conned and have conned us. Democracy games do not work with Islamics. That includes Turkey and Kosovo. All have been disasters and coming disasters.


5 posted on 04/22/2008 1:19:44 PM PDT by eleni121 (EN TOUTO NIKA!! +)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: eleni121

I don’t buy that. Democracy can work for all mankind, they just have to give it a shot. And by the way, it takes a while.


6 posted on 04/22/2008 1:23:15 PM PDT by moderatewolverine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: moderatewolverine

the neo cons have been conned and have conned us. Democracy games do not work with Islamics. That includes Turkey and Kosovo. All have been disasters and coming disasters.


7 posted on 04/22/2008 1:24:05 PM PDT by eleni121 (EN TOUTO NIKA!! +)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: moderatewolverine
Bill Kristol is stretching a point when he cites William Henry Seward and Henry Clay as advocates of intervention to promote democracy. Neither man, nor Lincoln for that matter, were advocates of pure democracy. For instance, Lincoln and Seward opposed the popular sovereignty notions of Northern Democrats like Douglas or Buchanan such as allowing the territories to decide whether slavery would be permitted. As President, Lincoln fervently opposed the will of the people toward neutrality in the Civil War or outright secession in border states like Missouri, Kentucky, and Maryland.

Furthermore, the context of the remarks would more likely imply leadership by example. Neither Clay nor Lincoln supported our involvement in the Mexican American War, with the former favoring annexation of Texas only if war with Mexico could be avoided. The absence of intervention in foreign wars, other than temporary expeditions such as the one against the Barbary pirates, until the Spanish-American War, speaks volumes as to the general attitude toward foreign intervention. It was the Federalists, later the Whigs, and last the Republicans, who were more opposed to foreign intervention, while the Democrats were inclined more to belligerence.

Circumstances change, and America is no longer a thinly populated frontier country effectively protected by two oceans. Our involvement overseas is an inevitable result of our size and power. Nonetheless, Kristol is guilty of misinterpreting the positions of important American historical figures.

8 posted on 04/22/2008 1:32:16 PM PDT by Wallace T.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: moderatewolverine

I’m an old fashioned conservative.

I don’t worry about my neighbor...until my neighbor come on my turf or causes problems for me. Then they’ve made their business my business.

9/11, and more, made the Middle East our business.


9 posted on 04/22/2008 1:35:39 PM PDT by rightinthemiddle (The Mainstream Media Controls Our Party. Go, RINOS!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: moderatewolverine

The basic ideology of islam - like communism - cannot support or abide by democratic system of government. It will always seek to destroy it.


10 posted on 04/22/2008 1:51:52 PM PDT by eleni121 (EN TOUTO NIKA!! +)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: moderatewolverine

I know what you mean

11 posted on 04/22/2008 2:01:15 PM PDT by xp38
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: moderatewolverine
It's incredible that some people shudder at this dirty word

It's not a dirty word, it just means domestically liberal while not being a wuss at foreign policy.

12 posted on 04/22/2008 2:25:31 PM PDT by jmc813 (Eek!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jmc813

I know this, but libs associate it with all sorts of nonsense...

that was a great way of putting it by the way, nice and concise.


13 posted on 04/22/2008 3:52:52 PM PDT by moderatewolverine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson