Neo-con - A liberal one-world chickenhawk posing as a conservative.
Paleo-con - A former KKK and current anti-semite posing as a super patriot.
The people who are labeled "neo-conservatives" by the culterati, literati and other birdbrains (paleo-ostrich division) imagining themselves wrongly to be the second coming of John Flynn or Charles Lindbergh when they are actually the second coming of Neville Chamberlain have a spot of difficulty distinguishing reality from fiction.
One-worlders are found on the Left. They suck up to the United Nations. They believe that diplomacy will save us, that Jacques Chirac is a good ally, that the leadership of Germany under Schroeder have no ties to the Bader-Meinhof gang of the 1960s and 1970s, that the US has had an "inordinate fear of communism" in the past, that Jimmuh Cahtuh deserved a Nobel Peace Prize for sucking up diplomatically to Third World dictators, that the Arkansas Antichrist was a good president, that there is too a tooth fairy AND an Easter Bunny.
Those that call themselves "paleoconservatives" are neither. What they are is a pack of unrealistic semi-nostalgics who pine for those golden and non-existent days of yore when they imagine conservatives were found in grumpy and snobby clubs, snoring under their newspapers in mid-afternoon in the easy chairs provided, waking for an occasional cognac or cigar, mouthing ill-formed lunacies as to the AFL-CIO being a hotbed of communism under George Meany because pay raises may reduce dividends, regarding the peasants not admitted to clubs of hereditary membership as "not our kind". The professorial caucus among them thrills to novels of derring-do safely performed by people other than themselves and preferably centuries ago. Such books stir their blood in life after polo.
Socially, they are far more comfortable with Franklin Roosevelt than with Ronald Reagan (an ex-Democrat and therefore a neo-conservative, right?)
Defining "chickenhawk" which the "paleoconservatives" have borrowed, like so much else, from the craven left, we may fairly conclude that the reference is to those who believe that American foreign policy may well be properly implemented by the use of military force where appropriate and desireable and that the military (which is designed to kill offending people and break their things) is as honorable profession now as it has always been which is very honorable indeed. Just as one need not write novels to criticize them, one need not have served in the military to support it.
Since the primary targets du jour of the term "chickenhawk" as used by the "paleo-ostriches" are Richard Perle, Paul Wolfowitz, Bill Kristol, Robert Kagan and other Jews who are actual conservative leaders, you may draw your own conclusions as to the knee-jerk prejudices of the "Paleo-cons".
There is no such thing as a conservative among the so-called "paleocons". If you doubt that, review the website of the Rockford Institute which may be found at chronicles.com which slaps some cheap rouge, garish lipstick and an overdose of face powder over the old prostitute that was Neville Chamberlain, rehashes the pacifistic bilge that died on December 7, 1941, and, if some meager remnant of that pacifistic bilge was ever revived, it died again on September 11, 2001, claims deep insight into the constitution having not a clue as to the document, and thinks America exists to favor charming, eccentric little tyrannies like Serbia and Iraq or jaded old European cowardly charlatans like France, ChIraq, Germany, Schroeder and Fischer, their mutual Belgian poodle and the usual gang of socialist Scandanavians like Hans Blix while taking lavender Raimondo (antiwar.com) seriously as a foreign policy guru when he is nothing more than warmed-over McGovern in drag.
Real conservatives believe in the use of military force, in social morality, law enforcement, babies, Ann Coulter, and would never publish idiocy like that of the Rockford Institute which is selling Ditzy Chicks albums on its website, and has called France a nation that is, always has been and always will be superior to the United States. Real conservatives DESPISE the United Nations and all of its works and all of its pomps and will not be satisfied with anything less than its elimination.
Those who are mislabeled as "neo-conservatives" ARE conservative. The "paleo-conservatives", to the extent that they claim to be conservative, are frauds.
As recently outlined in David Frum's April article in National Review Online, the "paleo-conservatives" were a group of socially eccentric losers who were in a snit over not being hired into the Reagan administration and so, in 1986, decided to re-create themselves in the fraudulent conceit that they and not those who had elected Reagan were the "conservatives" and they claimed to belatedly discover, horrors, Jewish influence among those who had been hired.
I happen to be Catholic but, hey, this is America and those Jewish conservative intellectuals, formerly associated with Ronald Reagan, now associated with Dubya, have done much good for America and for the conservative movement.