Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Neoconservative Persuasion
Weekly Standard ^ | 2003 | Irving Kristol

Posted on 05/24/2004 4:42:38 PM PDT by churchillbuff

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 441-454 next last

1 posted on 05/24/2004 4:42:38 PM PDT by churchillbuff
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: churchillbuff

Oh boy, what's a day without a Chamberlainbuff thread.


2 posted on 05/24/2004 4:44:27 PM PDT by CWOJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: churchillbuff

I find that description of neo-conservatism particularly uncompelling.


3 posted on 05/24/2004 4:48:31 PM PDT by MrShoop
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MrShoop

This is the second such thread trying to define neo-con. The other boiled down to anyone who doesn't support the defeatist position on the war in Iraq is a neo-con.


4 posted on 05/24/2004 4:50:05 PM PDT by CWOJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: CWOJackson

I thought a neo-con was someone who thought we should secure Iraq's/Afghstains' borders and leave our borders unsecured. ;->


5 posted on 05/24/2004 5:35:30 PM PDT by inflation (Cuba = BAD, China = Good? Why, should both be treated the way Cuba is?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: inflation

Same difference...same people using the term.


6 posted on 05/24/2004 5:37:30 PM PDT by CWOJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: CWOJackson
In defining neoconservatives, it is all too easy to list the leading neo names: Podhorwitz, Krystol, Krauthammer, Ledeen, Wolfowitz, etc. IOW, there is a statistical over-abundance of Jewish Americans in the neocon leadership.

Please don't jerk that knee, it's not anti-semitism to state an obvious fact. This gives the opportunity to real anti-semites to claim that Dubya has been taken over by the Jewish neocons and to invade Iraq was not in U.S. interests. And the rest of the world claims that Israel runs U.S. foreign policy because of the predominant iterest of neocons in the Bush administration. If you don't believe it, just read some foreign newspapers.

7 posted on 05/24/2004 6:02:06 PM PDT by xJones
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: churchillbuff

I'm a conservative and don't need the "neo" label to identify my persuasion. At the same time, I think conservatism is the stronger for the contribution of disaffected liberals, since we used to be them and know how they think. In no small part, the Left is infuriated by people who successfully steal the thunder out of their arguments. As a result, the Left has been left with nothing to say. In no small part, the neocons have helped to make America, in Micklewaithe and Wooldridge's apt phrase, "The Right Nation."


8 posted on 05/24/2004 6:05:22 PM PDT by goldstategop (In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives On In My Heart Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: xJones
Which papers, the french or the Arab?

I really don't much care what foreigners believe.

9 posted on 05/24/2004 6:09:57 PM PDT by CWOJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: churchillbuff

I've seen a couple of definitions:
one is a conservative Jew;
two is a Reagan democrat.


10 posted on 05/24/2004 6:12:42 PM PDT by Chi-townChief
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: churchillbuff
First, patriotism is a natural and healthy sentiment and should be encouraged by both private and public institutions. Precisely because we are a nation of immigrants, this is a powerful American sentiment. Second, world government is a terrible idea since it can lead to world tyranny. International institutions that point to an ultimate world government should be regarded with the deepest suspicion. Third, statesmen should, above all, have the ability to distinguish friends from enemies. This is not as easy as it sounds, as the history of the Cold War revealed. The number of intelligent men who could not count the Soviet Union as an enemy, even though this was its own self-definition, was absolutely astonishing.

Agree? Disagree?

Finally, for a great power, the "national interest" is not a geographical term, except for fairly prosaic matters like trade and environmental regulation. A smaller nation might appropriately feel that its national interest begins and ends at its borders, so that its foreign policy is almost always in a defensive mode. A larger nation has more extensive interests.

"The business of America is business." - Calvin Coolidge.

11 posted on 05/24/2004 6:25:21 PM PDT by Tailgunner Joe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: xJones
How did you forget to leave the names of good Jewish boys like Victor Davis Hanson, Fred Barnes, Don Rumsfeld or Dick Cheney. Oh wait, that's right. They're not Jewish. And the last two folks are two of the most powerful men in the administration, not "undersecretaries." Yeah, I can see how logical it is to equate neo-conservatism with Jewishness. Makes perfect sense.

By the way, one last question: Why can't posters warning about the Jewish conspiracy at least spell the names of the conspirators correctly? Or do you just copy their names from foreign newspapers?
12 posted on 05/24/2004 6:35:49 PM PDT by asmith92008 (If we buy into the nonsense that we always have to vote for RINOs, we'll just end up taking the horn)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: churchillbuff

code word for JOOZ


13 posted on 05/24/2004 6:36:52 PM PDT by cyborg (tit for tat butter for fat hillary is ugly that's a fact)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tailgunner Joe
Perhaps a definition of neo-con is a Republican more comfortable in the salons of Wall Street than a barbecue no Main Street.
14 posted on 05/24/2004 6:57:34 PM PDT by asmith92008 (If we buy into the nonsense that we always have to vote for RINOs, we'll just end up taking the horn)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop
I'm a conservative and don't need the "neo" label to identify my persuasion.

Then complain to Kristol or Podhoretz, because it's their word - one of them (I don't know which) coined it, if I understand correctly.

15 posted on 05/24/2004 7:12:55 PM PDT by churchillbuff
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: cyborg
code word for JOOZ

Oh, that's why Irving Kristol uses it to describe a certain political philosophy. He's a notorious anti-semite. (sarcasm)

16 posted on 05/24/2004 7:15:53 PM PDT by churchillbuff
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: churchillbuff

http://www.newamerica.net/index.cfm?pg=article&pubID=1189

Perhaps I should have been more clear. Here's the type of talk about neocons that I'm referring to.


17 posted on 05/24/2004 7:19:18 PM PDT by cyborg (tit for tat butter for fat hillary is ugly that's a fact)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: CWOJackson; cyborg; Pukin Dog; Texasforever; Miss Marple; Howlin; Catspaw; MeekOneGOP; ...
Would this be a good place to say how DAMNED TIRED I am of so many people seeming to want to fracture the Right into little competing groups?

The Left has its factions, too, but when the election happens, you better know that they ALL vote together by a large margin. They don't whine abour someone not being "Liberal Enough" on election n day, and skulk off to some whacko third party in a useless snit, or say "Good Riddance", they do whatever is necessary TO WIN the next election! Once in power, they figure, everything else works itself out if only their agenda is advanced, even a little.

Just THINK where we'd be now if conservatives - of ALL types - thought that way. We MIGHT even have avoided 8 years of Slick and his harridan wife. We MIGHT have not had to deal with 2000 and its aftermath, or the constant threat of the Dims taking the Senate, or even their still-powerful influence there. We MIGHT have enough pull AS ONE to kill stuff we find offensive, like amnesty and prescription drugs, in the cradle.

But NOOOOOoooo, we attack each other like dogs after a bone while the Dims just chuckle and encourage it.

Here's the facts...The President is a conservative leaning Republican. Is he perfect? No. However, he IS the best we can hope for in the current American political landscape. I hope no one has forgotten the influence of the media, Hollywood, academia, etc. nowadays. Ronald Reagan himself would have been demonized to a level you could not believe today. Oh, wait, sorry, he HAS been lately, hasn't he? His great fortune was that those he ran against were so incompetent and loathsome to voters then, he shined like the star he was through it all. We can't count on that today.

In November, one of two men will emerge as President...George Bush or John Kerry. Rail about that FACT all you want, but it is still the truth. What do you want, a comitted Leftist who wouldn't give a conservative's views the time of day, or a Right-leaning Republican who will at least listen to the Right? Which one do you want choosing judges, appointing government officials, or prosecuting the Terror War? You have ONLY those two choices, you know, and sorry, staying home is not only intellectual and political laziness, but in time of war, is a near-criminal abrogation of your responsibilities as a citizen.

Current poll numbers indicate that the President is in a tight spot at best. He SHOULD be running far in the lead, with the economy picking up steam, and the public rallying around him in wartime. His ENTIRE side of the political spectrum should be behind him now. Rest assured, the Dims are fully behind Kerry, and don't expect Nader to save us this time...they're already well into their attacks on HIM, and their other means to confound him. To put it bluntly, we are now facing "Broken Glass Democrats". If the President was as much of a Liberal as some claim, why are they so fired up to defeat him?

We need to get some clues, and a grip. Those who think that a Kerry presidency wouldn't be too bad, because THEN we'd get a "REAL conservative" replacing him, are living in 1980.

Thinking like that gave us Clinton's second term.

It is my personal belief that Pat Buchanan himself thinks this, which is why he's doing his level best to help Kerry by fracturing the President's base...he fancies HIMSELF the "conservative white knight" who will ride in and save us all. He would look just fine in a Napoleon suit. This is NOT 1980, folks. Like it or not, the country has changed since then, and those on the Left have done everything they can to eliminate the possibility of another Reagan humiliating them like that once more.

Religious, Libertarian, Constitutionalist, Republican, we are ALL "The Right". We either stick together, and advance our agenda (one step at a time if need be) or we give up and let the Dims have everything. We'll have no one to complain about but ourselves, then.

For God's sake, END this stupid "eating our own" crap. It gets us NOTHING but defeat, at the hands of those we ALL are SUPPOSED to be resisting.

A so-called Neo-Con can also be expected to vote for lower taxes, if politely persuaded. Likewise, he is amenable to less gun control. A libertarian supports MOST of the things we do, why not find the common ground and give a little once the Left is defeated? At least they can be talked to about these things, the Left most assuredly cannot.

My version of paradise is an America with NO "Leftists", whom I believe are an anomaly anyway. Wouldn't it be great if the Left were so discredited and defeated that they never posed a serious threat again, and the main argument was between Libertarians, say, and Conservatives? Or between Conservatives and Neo-Cons? Sure, we'd have some disagreements, but we'd ALL get at least SOMETHING we wanted. Most of the disagreements PALE in comparison to those we have with the Left, anyway.

And isn't the thought of Hillary, Pelosi, and Kennedy having to finally WORK for a living a nice one?

We CAN make it happen, folks.

18 posted on 05/24/2004 7:32:41 PM PDT by Long Cut ("Fightin's commenced, Ike, now get to fightin' or get outta the way!"...Wyatt Earp, in Tombstone)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: churchillbuff

I am just as sick of the likes of you as I am of the media.


19 posted on 05/24/2004 7:35:50 PM PDT by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: asmith92008
Perhaps a definition of neo-con is a Republican more comfortable in the salons of Wall Street than a barbecue no Main Street.

Sounds like class warfare rhetoric to me.

20 posted on 05/24/2004 7:36:14 PM PDT by Tailgunner Joe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 441-454 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson