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

To: sauropod
If no, then you are not a neo-con in the way i define the term.

THAT'S THE PROBLEM! The definition keeps changing.

You just said, "in the way i define the term."

That doesn't cut it. I gave the proper definition for it (and it is true). Therefore I am a neocon and will always be one since I came from Left to Right. Any other definition is propaganda used to impugn. And I don't play that game.

Period.

When someone throws the first punch, that person can't complain if he or she gets beaten to within an inch of his or her life. In other words, don't start nuthin', won't be nuthin'.

85 posted on 08/12/2002 9:23:54 AM PDT by rdb3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies ]


To: rdb3
No, that is not the meaning of "neo-con."

Neo-con is a synonym with "national greatness" conservatism espoused by Mr. Kristol among others. That is always the way i have heard it defined and it is my definition.

By your definition, i am also a "neo-con" since i became rabidly right-wing about 1990 or so and I am over 40 years of age. But, I do not think your definition is the way it is used in the vernacular.

89 posted on 08/12/2002 9:35:16 AM PDT by sauropod
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies ]

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