The neocon moment is over

[poncho]

[FONT=Arial,sans-serif][FONT=arial,sans-serif] So-called "neo" conservatism has its roots in a Marxist view of the world. So it is not surprising that the neocons are trying to silence their most prominent conservative critic.[/FONT][/FONT][FONT=Arial,sans-serif][FONT=arial,sans-serif]
[/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,sans-serif][FONT=arial,sans-serif] That would be Texas Rep. Ron Paul. He outraged the neocons dur ing the Republican presidential debate last week by advocating that the GOP return to the traditional conservative stance of noninterventionism. Paul invoked the ghost of Robert Taft, the GOP Senate leader who fought entry into NATO. And he also pointed out that messing around in the Mideast creates risks here at home. [/FONT][/FONT]

[FONT=Arial,sans-serif][FONT=arial,sans-serif] That prompted Rudy Giuliani to interrupt Paul and demand that he retract his remarks. Paul not only refused to bow to Il Duce, but after the debate, Paul told the TV audience that the self-appointed saint of 9/11 might consider reading the report of the 9/11 commission, which makes the same point in some detail. [/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,sans-serif][FONT=arial,sans-serif] The following day, I wrote a column taking Paul's side in the debate. I expected the usual response from brainwashed Bush loyalists who believe the Iraq war is going so well that attacks on Iran and Syria are long overdue.[/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,sans-serif][FONT=arial,sans-serif]
[/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,sans-serif][FONT=arial,sans-serif] That didn't happen. Instead I was deluged with e-mails agreeing with Paul's position.[/FONT][/FONT]


[FONT=Arial,sans-serif][FONT=arial,sans-serif]Continue...

Neocons also share their world view with Trotsky, Machiavelli and Leo Straus. Summed up, perpetual change and the noble lie.
[/FONT][/FONT]

 

[carpro]

[FONT=Arial,sans-serif][FONT=arial,sans-serif] So-called "neo" conservatism has its roots in a Marxist view of the world. [/FONT][/FONT][FONT=Arial,sans-serif][FONT=arial,sans-serif]
[/FONT][/FONT]

Oh, puh....leeeeze.

 

[2 Timothy2:1-4]

It just gets better and better.:laugh:

 

[Baptist in Richmond]

Hey Poncho,

Apparently, some people don't really understand neoconservatism.
As for their moment being over, they are not going to simply give up and hand over power.

Regards,
BiR

 

[Dale-c]

Poncho, I heard that was good but didn't catch it myself.

Yes, the neo cons are simply conserving fascism.
I heard a great quote once:
When it is wrong to be a conservative?
When what you are conserving is WRONG!

 

[carpro]

Hey Poncho,

Apparently, some people don't really understand neoconservatism.
As for their moment being over, they are not going to simply give up and hand over power.

Regards,
BiR

There is no great need to "understand" labels.

 

[carpro]

Yes, the neo cons are simply conserving fascism.

Someone needs to make up their mind. Marxist or fascist?

Which will it be tomorrow?:laugh:

 

[2 Timothy2:1-4]

Someone needs to make up their mind. Marxist or fascist?

Which will it be tomorrow?:laugh:

Yea they might want to talk to Kerry, Kennedy, and the coat tail rider about marxism.

 

[Bro. Curtis]

So now the term "neocon" has evolved to mean anyone who doesn't support Ron Paul ?

And since nobody can give a good description of the term, and people only seem to use the term to put others down, how 'bout we can it ?

And this Ron Paul worship reminds me of this verse......

Matthew 24:23 Then if any man shall say unto you, Lo, here is Christ, or there; believe it not.

Ron Paul may be a good candidate, may be he's not. But most of his supporters, including the hate site prison planet, are nuts.

 

[NiteShift]

If the so-called neocon movement is indeed over, it means little to me, as I have been a Reagan Democrat for about 25 years.

What do the Paleolib guys have to offer up instead - Pat Buchanan? Lew Rockwell? Crypto-Libertarian-Anarcho-Capitalism?

As Homey the Clown would have said, "I don't thank so".

 

[JamieinNH]

So now the term "neocon" has evolved to mean anyone who doesn't support Ron Paul ?

Hi Bro Curtis. Isn't this like any other term used in politics? Terms change according to the time and who you're talking to.

I have been called un-patriotic because I don't support the war in Iraq. I fully support the troops, and my posts have been consistent with that, but that doesn't mean I believe in this war.

People from both sides have called the others everything under the sun, and yet now it's a problem? It's been a problem and it's ashame that we can't come together in disagreement without the need of labels and name calling.

And since nobody can give a good description of the term, and people only seem to use the term to put others down, how 'bout we can it ?

I agree, but this should include all name calling and labels. I don't hold much hope for this happening though. Look over the politics section of this board, a Christian board and one can see that it's hard for people to disagree without slinging names around.

You and I have had our debates and yet we seem to be able to conclude it with some understanding on each side without labeling each other. A good debate isn't about changing the other persons opinion, but to share information that might get them to think. Yet here on this board, you see people trying hard to change people's opinions and when they don't change then the labels start. From that point on the whole debate is lost in a vicous(sp) cycle.

The members of this board should rise above this type of fighting. So I agree we should stop with the neocon label and all other labels. Anyone willing to step up in the public forum and vow to stop?

And this Ron Paul worship reminds me of this verse......

I like Ron Paul, but I wouldn't say it's a worship. To me in my opinion, of all the people running on both sides he has offered our country the best hope. Is my opinion fluid, yes. I would have voted for someone else before he entered the race. I am a Democrat and yet I would cross the party line and vote for him because I think he is a good, honest, decent man and would do a great job running our country. Is he 100% right about everything? No. But is anyone that is running? No.

Ron Paul may be a good candidate, may be he's not. But most of his supporters, including the hate site prison planet, are nuts.

I am glad you said most and not all of his suuporters. I don't find myself in a hating or nuts category.

Take care my friend
Jamie

 

[Baptist in Richmond]

So now the term "neocon" has evolved to mean anyone who doesn't support Ron Paul ?

Greetings Bro. Curtis,

It is not to those of us who have actually read the writings of Kristol, et al and who know who they are and their agenda. To those among us who are less discerning, it may very well be.....

Regards, hope all is well in Montana,
BiR

 

[Bro. Curtis]

I guess I'm dumb, BiR, cuz I have no idea what you just said. I would think Kristol would be like Kryptonite, to a Chomsky fan such as yourself. And if you are saying the neocons are the only one with an agenda, then yer being silly.


So, once and for all, what is a "neocon" ? And why should I not resent being called one ?

 

[poncho]

I guess I'm dumb, BiR, cuz I have no idea what you just said. I would think Kristol would be like Kryptonite, to a Chomsky fan such as yourself. And if you are saying the neocons are the only one with an agenda, then yer being silly.


So, once and for all, what is a "neocon" ? And why should I not resent being called one ?

I would say fascists who admire the likes of Trotsky, Machiavelli and Strauss more than Marx. They seem to believe in perpetual change (revolution) "creative destruction" (order out of chaos) and the "noble lie". You, imho are not a neocon Bro Curtis. I'd say you're an honest guy caught up in the "noble lies" of others.

Chomsky has made some good points in the past but to my way of thinking he's just a gatekeeper for the lefties who are pushing their own brand of "noble lies".

 

[Rufus_1611]

I would say fascists who admire the likes of Trotsky, Machiavelli and Strauss more than Marx. They seem to believe in perpetual change (revolution) "creative destruction" (order out of chaos) and the "noble lie". You, imho are not a neocon Bro Curtis. I'd say you're an honest guy caught up in the "noble lies" of others.

Chomsky has made some good points in the past but to my way of thinking he's just a gatekeeper for the lefties who are pushing their own brand of "noble lies".

Well said...especially on Chomsky.

 

[Bro. Curtis]

You, imho are not a neocon Bro Curtis. I'd say you're an honest guy caught up in the "noble lies" of others.

I see. I'm not a neo-con, but I'm also not quite smart enough to keep myself from being controlled by them.


I feel much better.

I think, since not even poncho can give an honest definition of the term, we ban the word "neocon". I think we set a poor Christian example calling people names we're not willing to explain.

 

[JamieinNH]

I think we set a poor Christian example calling people names we're not willing to explain.

You're close.. I think we set a poor Christian example calling people names period.

Jamie

 

[Rufus_1611]

You're close.. I think we set a poor Christian example calling people names period.

Jamie

"Neo-con" is not a name calling tactic any more than labeling someone a liberal or a conservative is. It is a label for a political ideology promoted by Kristol, Podhoretz etc. and implemented with fervor by folks like Bush, Cheney, Wolfowitz, Rove, Limbaugh, Hannity etc. Being a neo or new conservative does not make you a traditional conservative. Thus, those who support the policies of these neoconservatives are neo-cons or at the least neo-con supporters. Traits of these policies include "spending like drunken sailors" and engaging in pre-emptive wars and nation building for the purpose of empirical expansion. Many neo-cons are embarrassed by the term and prefer to be called "conservatives" without the burden of engaging in conservative beliefs. Thus, my encouragement to folks that do not want to be called neo-cons would be to abandon neoconservative principles and leadership.

 

[Bro. Curtis]

Finally an answer.

I feel that neocon is starting to mean anyone who doesn't believe that prison planet garbage, but at least you attempt to answer a question, without impuning the one who asked it.

And since I feel that Bush's spending policies are outta control, since 2002, and I don't buy the nation building either, but, like KenH, (who also throws the term around with no explanation) I supported the overthrow of Sadaam....why am I called one ?

The term is thrown around here as an insult, by people who refuse to explain it. That's why it's taken as an insult. It needs to stop. It's not at all like calling someone liberal or conservative, because those terms need not be explained.

 

[JamieinNH]

"Neo-con" is not a name calling tactic any more than labeling someone a liberal or a conservative is. It is a label for a political ideology promoted by Kristol, Podhoretz etc. and implemented with fervor by folks like Bush, Cheney, Wolfowitz, Rove, Limbaugh, Hannity etc. Being a neo or new conservative does not make you a traditional conservative. Thus, those who support the policies of these neoconservatives are neo-cons or at the least neo-con supporters. Traits of these policies include "spending like drunken sailors" and engaging in pre-emptive wars and nation building for the purpose of empirical expansion. Many neo-cons are embarrassed by the term and prefer to be called "conservatives" without the burden of engaging in conservative beliefs. Thus, my encouragement to folks that do not want to be called neo-cons would be to abandon neoconservative principles and leadership.

While you did a good job explaining what it meant, my opinion is it's still a label just like any other and we shouldn't label each other unless the label is Brother/Sister or Christian.

Labels always start off with "good" intent, and then degrade from there. If one wants to do away with a label they find offensive, then it should start with all labels. At least that's my opinion.

Jamie