I think neo-conservatives should more appropriately be referred to as pseudo-conservatives.
1 posted on
09/26/2002 2:36:29 PM PDT by
jstone78
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-45 next last
To: jstone78
I think the "NEO" label has been done to death and is pointless.
2 posted on
09/26/2002 2:38:31 PM PDT by
finnman69
To: jstone78
"Religious right" conservatives, who try to impose their religious beliefs on people who don't share them, by means of government force, are hard-core pseudo-conservative.
To: jstone78
Neither 41 nor 43 are conservatives.
To: jstone78
Hyphens suck.
To: jstone78
The only thing I disagree with is the "restoration of school prayer." Anyone, at any time, can pray in school. And it need not be a big production.
6 posted on
09/26/2002 2:42:10 PM PDT by
GSWarrior
To: jstone78
There are no liberals in your world. Just conservatives and neo-conservatives.
7 posted on
09/26/2002 2:42:19 PM PDT by
Dog Gone
To: jstone78
I think we should define "neo-conservative." If memory serves, the first person labeled as a "neo-con" was William F. Buckley.
In the 2000 Presidential campaign, liberals in the press started calling McCain and William Kristol neo-cons.
Now, Chris Matthews calls everyone in the Bush administration (except Colin Powell) neo-cons, and means it as a horrible insult.
I've been called a neo-con both as a compliment and a slur, but what the heck does the term even mean?
8 posted on
09/26/2002 2:42:38 PM PDT by
inkling
To: jstone78
Paleo-conservatives are divisive, often hateful, and arrogant in the extreme.
9 posted on
09/26/2002 2:43:26 PM PDT by
sinkspur
To: jstone78
Neo-conservative litmus tests:
1. Do you agree with FDR's New Deal interpretation of the commerce clause, and all subsequent government powers/court rulings that have sprung from it?
2. There is a hypothetical election with no Democratic or third party candidates. The person who wins the Republican nomination wins the election. The candidates for nomination are Ron Paul and George Bush. Who do you vote for?
3. Would you approve of a law that forced Congress to cite a specifically enumerated constitutional power before it can pass a law? Also, apply this to every law already on the books.
Failing any one of these is a sure sign of a neo-con.
12 posted on
09/26/2002 2:45:06 PM PDT by
freeeee
To: jstone78
So Neo-cons= Republacrats?
Unfortunately there is no fine line. Bush can be found all over the map on this as could many other good Repubs. Its called politics and its a sickos game to start off with.
17 posted on
09/26/2002 2:48:10 PM PDT by
Democrap
To: jstone78
I always thought the difference between neocons and cons was, the former would be more likely to smoke a joint with ya...
What's your distinction between Old and New Rightists?
20 posted on
09/26/2002 2:52:00 PM PDT by
maxwell
To: jstone78
Excellent post. Run for office!
21 posted on
09/26/2002 2:52:01 PM PDT by
4CJ
To: jstone78
Well done, thanks,
If you want to see magazine contrasts - For Conservatism read The American Conservative that Buchanan launched at the National Press Club Wednesday. For Neo-Con read Kristol's Weekly Standard.
24 posted on
09/26/2002 2:54:48 PM PDT by
ex-snook
To: jstone78
I think neo-conservatives should more appropriately be referred to as pseudo-conservatives. I think jstone78 should referred to as an idiot.
26 posted on
09/26/2002 2:56:12 PM PDT by
Cable225
To: jstone78
This is one area needing lots and lots more discussion -- November 6, 2002 would be the perfect time to revisit this topic. Right now, we need to focus on removing as many Democrats as possible in this upcoming election.
28 posted on
09/26/2002 2:56:45 PM PDT by
meadsjn
To: jstone78
Well, this attitude should really help you "real conservatives" put together the electoral margins needed for victory - yessirree, Bob.
I note you have Reagan on your list - but unlike you, I remember the '80s, and how you and the rest of the bluenosed crowd treated him - and it was shabby.
To: jstone78
Recent thread on conservatism---interesting...
post!
To: jstone78
Ok, I'm risking a shelacking here, but hey, I'm among friends, I hope...
We got into trouble when we lost control of "liberal". As in, John Locke liberal.
Most of what we call Conservative, in the US, is classic liberal. Limited Government, individual liberty, private property. If you believe in that, you are a classic liberal. But since the socialists stole our name (our id was in our wallet when they stole that too...) we have been forced to make do with the Conservative name.
Certainly many of us are also "conservative", in US terms, since we are conserving the constitution, which is a classic liberal document. But the original meaning of conservative doesn't necessarily apply to most US conservatives. We are not tradition bound. Conservatives are where its happening, intellectually, right now. Certainly the left is intellectually moribund, and conformist to the point of uniformity.
US conservatives are at home with change, they are agents of change, their ideas are the only new ones on the scene, and as they become more confident they are almost revolutionary. So the "traditionalist" meaning of the word "conservative" clearly doesn't apply.
52 posted on
09/26/2002 3:25:37 PM PDT by
marron
To: jstone78
You don't happen to play "America's Army" occasionally, do you? I think I was playing with someone with that name a day or two ago under the name "Laerithil."
Just a random comment.
To: jstone78
To continue my thought, William F Buckley is certainly a conservative, in the traditionalist Russel Kirk sense, with whom he is closely linked, but he is also a classic liberal. Limited government, individual liberty, private property.
He is also in favor of legalizing marijuana. So is he a libertarian?
55 posted on
09/26/2002 3:29:43 PM PDT by
marron
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-45 next last
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson