Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Is this supposed to be a refutation of what I said, because all I see are a bunch of names.
Neocons are people who hold liberal beliefs (welfare, spending, expansion of government) and support aggressive, diplomatic and military, foreign intervention.
Conservatives are people who believe that the role of government should be restricted to only things such as national defense (not policing the world), and protection of individual rights.
I agree that the Neoconservatives are not Conservatives just like the National Socialists were not Socialists. I don't agree that Obama fits the definition of a Neocon because that isn't true, unless you start making up your own definitions (Neocon fashion). Obama does not favor premptive use of military force just as the Conservatives do not; that is however a keystone in Neocon dogma. While Neocons favor spendthrift fiscal policy and a bloated government just like the Liberals, both are directed toward American geopolitical dominance in the world, not social welfare of the American people, which puts them very much at odds with the Liberals. You may argue that the Obama Administration stood for the same things, practiced the same things, and believed the same things. The American people seem to perceive differences, and in time its possible you may too.
If that is your sole basis of determining who is a neocon then apparently you believe that Hillary Clinton, Tom Daschle, Chris Dodd, John Edwards, John Kerry, Harry Reid, Chuck Schumer, and many other liberals, also voted for the war authorization. I guess that makes them the same thing as every other neocon
You are the one who claimed that the 'Conservatives' were vastly different from the 'neo-cons'. Don't try and save your argument by tossing up a bunch of so-called 'liberals'.
You are the one who claimed that the 'Conservatives' were vastly different from the 'neo-cons'. Don't try and save your argument by tossing up a bunch of so-called 'liberals'.
That's the second time you've tried to hide behind that Nancy argument. What's the point of claiming two different things are the same because you can see some common elements? I've heard Stalin and Hitler are both Socialists AND are both Fascists because the both ran oppressive governments. Maybe the sun and the moon are both the same thing because they are both big and round and up in the sky? Cow pies and chocolate pudding are the same thing because both are dark and gooey? Yum yum! What is the goal behind these ridiculous assertions? A language with 300 words like the Hottentots use? One of those keyboards with pictures, like they have at MacDonalds for making posts on CD?
That's the second time you've tried to hide behind that Nancy argument. What's the point of claiming two different things are the same because you can see some common elements? I've heard Stalin and Hitler are both Socialists AND are both Fascists because the both ran oppressive governments. Maybe the sun and the moon are both the same thing because they are both big and round and up in the sky? Cow pies and chocolate pudding are the same thing because both are dark and gooey? Yum yum! What is the goal behind these ridiculous assertions? A language with 300 words like the Hottentots use? One of those keyboards with pictures, like they have at MacDonalds for making posts on CD?
What's the matter, Nancy - too many yum, yum cow pies in your diet? The 'Conservative' label you've been hiding behind is wearing a bit thin and so are the excuses for your party, who so viciously attacked all of the real 'liberals' like Kucinich and Gravel who called for a stoppage of the neo-con blood letting party. You Conservatives care a lot more about money than human life, and if you can squeeze the extra dollars from social programs, you are the first in line. If a war benefits you, you are all for it, who cares if a million die - all is fair in the pursuit of your 'noble' wealth accumulating cause, right?
What's the matter, Nancy - too many yum, yum cow pies in your diet? The 'Conservative' label you've been hiding behind is wearing a bit thin and so are the excuses for your party, who so viciously attacked all of the real 'liberals' like Kucinich and Gravel who called for a stoppage of the neo-con blood letting party. You Conservatives care a lot more about money than human life, and if you can squeeze the extra dollars from social programs, you are the first in line. If a war benefits you, you are all for it, who cares if a million die - all is fair in the pursuit of your 'noble' wealth accumulating cause, right?
So you don't know any more about Conservatives than you do anything else, do you?
I think you are confusing neocons with conservatives. The two are most definitely NOT one and the same. A neocon is liberal who believes in strongly asserting domestic interests in foreign lands through economic and/or military means.
To my opinion, most Americans are neocons... until something like Vietnam or Iraq happens.
Minding one's own business is not a trait possessed by any major political party,
Although today, most republicans seem to embrace neoconservativism...
and democrats seem to embrace it while saying something else to the public.
To my opinion, most Americans are neocons... until something like Vietnam or Iraq happens.
Minding one's own business is not a trait possessed by any main political party.
I'm not sure I understand you. The whole "neocon" thing is the brainchild of Irving and William Kristol, and dates back to the Nixon White House. Its foundation is Henry Kissinger's idea that if you get involved in the affairs of other countries you can find a way to make money off of them. Donald Rumsfeld, Karl Rove, and Dick Cheney have sung the praises of this philosophy since Reagan and Bush the First. I don't think they are affected by things like Viet Nam and Iraqat all. Those things aren't failures by their definition as long as money was made. They don't exist without preemptive military action as their "foreign policy". That makes them fascists by most definitions.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
