Not only Jooos but McCain, Graham and most of the tools that advised GWB and others qualify as NEOCONS aka not Conservative! http://www.freedomvrights.com/classicalvneo.html:
“Neo-conservatives and classical conservatives may very well share positions on some issues. Perhaps this is why neo-conservatives frequently regard themselves as simply “conservative.” But the formal assumptions from which they begin are logically incompatible with one another. That neo-conservatism and classical conservatism are as distinct from each other as the utilitarian and natural law traditions can be seen from their respective answers to questions concerning the basic character of reason/knowledge, morality, and the State.
Reason/knowledge. Neo-conservatives, whether they explicitly admit as much, endorse a trans-cultural, trans-historical conception of Reason. Reason, on this score, while influenced by tradition, is ultimately capable of rising over and against it. When neo-conservatives (and others, for that matter) approvingly cite Jefferson’s affirmation of “self-evident” truths, this is the model of Reason on which they rely.
Classical conservatives, in contrast, from at least the time of Burke in the eighteenth century, have repeatedly rejected this notion of Reason as a rationalist’s dream. The individual has reason, it is true, but his reason is the product of centuries of tradition. Knowledge consists not in the abstract intellectual apprehension of “self-evident truths,” but in unarticulated feelings, habits, and customs that have become “second nature.”
Morality. Inseparable from the neo-conservative’s abstract, universalistic, tradition-neutral notion of Reason is an equally abstract, universalistic, tradition-neutral conception of morality. Morality is comprised essentially of “principles,” specifically, principles of “natural” or “human right.” Neo-conservatives are as given to the language of “human rights” as are their ideological opponents on the Left. These principles are uniquely accessible to all rational beings.
Classical conservatives, on the other hand, have tended to eschew all talk of “natural rights” and/or “human rights.” Morality is local, tradition-constituted. Whatever principles there may be, they are the offspring of a historically specific, shared way of life, and not its parent: principle stands in relation to practice the way cliff notes relate to the text that they summarize, not the other way around.
The State. Neo-conservatives, like ideologues of various left and right wing persuasions, conceive the State as an “enterprise association.” This is the term that the twentieth century conservative British philosopher Michael Oakeshott used to describe a model of the State on which it is said to exist for the sake of bringing to fruition some premeditated ideal or end, like Freedom, Equality, Virtue, Security, Prosperity, or Democracy. The ideal is held to transcend society, but it is the goal toward the accomplishment of which the resources of citizens must be deployed. At no time is a State more like an enterprise association than during times of war, for it is when a state is at war that government must have every available quantum of power at its disposal in order to insure victory. Also, it is in war that citizens are expected to make a concerted effort to bring about the telos, the purpose, for the sake of which the association exists. This explains why even when a nation is not literally at war, ideologues on both the Right and Left avail themselves of the language of war in order to unify support behind their favored causes (“The War on Poverty,” “The War on Drugs,” “The Cultural Wars,” etc.).....”
Tom DeLorenzo’s (Misean libertarian) current views of NeoCons:
“The neocons are becoming unglued and freaked out because they no longer control the culture of ideas among “conservatives” as they did when the former CIA employee William F. Buckley, Jr. was at the helm of their flagship magazine. No longer can the ideas of a Frank Meyer, one of the founders of National Review who was a harsh critic of Lincoln, be thrown down the memory hole. There are too many independent scholars who are more interested in pursuing the truth than in “spinning” 150-year-old political rhetoric to “justify” the scheming plans of the military/industrial/congressional complex. Young people especially are concerned about the erosion of civil liberties and have become highly suspicious of tired old, belligerent neocons like Harry Jaffa and his followers (like Rich Lowry) who assure them that NSA spying, warrantless wiretaps, state snooping on all financial transactions, censorship of the internet, and intimidation of the media is all kosher because, after all, “Father Abraham” suspended Habeas Corpus, censored telegraph communications, and shut down opposition newspapers.
A prerequisite for the final collapse of the Soviet Union was the widespread disbelief in all the lies, myths and superstitions about socialism that the people of the Soviet empire had been brainwashed into accepting. Once no one any longer believed in socialism, the system was doomed despite all of its military might and all of the willingness of communist politicians to brutalize their own people.
As Rothbard said, all state power ultimately rests on a body of ideas that occupy the minds of the citizens. That is what so terrifies the neocons like Rich Lowry: They know how absurd it sounds to America’s youth to hear Obama invoke THEIR rhetoric about the Declaration, government of the people, by the people, etc., and “American exceptionalism” to make his case for yet another war in yet another Middle East country that poses no threat whatsoever to them. More and more young Americans have come to understand that it is the warfare state, propped up by the neocon propaganda apparatus, that is the biggest threat to themselves and their futures.”