It could be argued that Kristol, Kraut and others termed “neo cons” are actually New Left.
1. They are all big gov devotees and Washington insiders.
2. They believe that nation building justifies foreign wars/interventions.
3. They don’t object to amnesty for alien trespassers and are the quickest to say, “You can’t deport 20 million people.”
4. They don’t reject global warming and often make a “what would you wager” argument that even if the world isn’t getting hotter green is good blah blah blah.
5. They exhibit little or no interest in the business sector or flyover country or what the average person does for a living and the problems we face.
6. They are said to be big Zionists but, with a noncommital nod, tend to bestow legitimacy to inane claims of grievances by the Palestinians that no other people alive could get away with.
7. They’ll site Goldwater’s loss in 1964 twice as often as they will 1980, and they all seem to DREAD Sarah Palin.
Let’s cut the crap and call them what they are: the New Left.
Spot on. They have been the vanguard of the left infiltrating their one supposedly ‘opposition’ party.
I don’t call myself PaleoLurker (or MercantilistLurker), but I do believe there is disagreement as to whether paleocons are necessarily protectionist.
I would side with those who consider protectionism as needlessly freedom compromising. However, I don’t believe that protectionism from trading partners should go uncountered or unopposed.
Thank you Bob... brilliant and precise!
LLS