For some reason, certain groups thought it would be a wise idea to expand the definition of neoconservative while simultaneously attempting to demonize neoconservatives. I suppose this was a semi-intentional gambit to try to expunge views they disagreed with from the mainstream. In effect, it entrenched these views as the mainstream.
I wonder how William McKinley would be labelled by these people, were he a politician today. Deeply religious, believing in persuing American interests internationally, wanting to leverage American advantages in business through free trade (albeit using tarriffs where appropriate to protect industry), willing to fight against tyranny in places like Cuba. I imagine he would be called a neocon, which begs the question- how 'new' can this conservatism be if it has been around for over 100 years?
Well, it poked its head up about a hundred years ago, but then went away not long after TR finished his presidency, and didn't really resurface until after WWII.