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

To: AndyJackson
I disagree with you wholeheartedly. He is responding to a label which has been foistered on people. It's like labelling a group of people something and then complaining when that group refuses to define the label.

One of his major points is one which I have made repeatedly-- the term neoconservative as it is used by the left and by the paleoconservatives has no meaning. You say he can't tell you what it is-- and that is because no one can. Any attempt to define neoconservatives omits the majority of the people who supposedly are neoconservatives.

40 posted on 09/28/2003 6:05:13 PM PDT by William McKinley
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies ]


To: William McKinley
the term neoconservative as it is used by the left and by the paleoconservatives has no meaning

I already know that. What concerns me is that there are people around who describe themselves as neo-cons, such as this author, who also have no clue what it means. All I can tell is that it is a tribal label. If it stands for something, this author sure doesn't know what it is.

49 posted on 09/28/2003 6:11:16 PM PDT by AndyJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies ]

To: William McKinley
Any attempt to define neoconservatives omits the majority of the people who supposedly are neoconservatives.


Oh, you are not for Israel?
68 posted on 09/28/2003 6:24:43 PM PDT by inPhase
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies ]

To: William McKinley
He is responding to a label which has been foistered on people. It's like labelling a group of people something and then complaining when that group refuses to define the label. One of his major points is one which I have made repeatedly-- the term neoconservative as it is used by the left and by the paleoconservatives has no meaning. You say he can't tell you what it is-- and that is because no one can. Any attempt to define neoconservatives omits the majority of the people who supposedly are neoconservatives.

Well done. Succinct and correct!

The attackers of 'neo-cons' have to use a bait and switch. They are attacking a robust pro-freedom interventionist foreign policy, one that most conservatives share; but they want to make it seem to be a narrow agenda of a bunch of Zionists. So "what they want" is defined in one way - broadly; "who they are" is defined another - narrowly. This makes a broad foreign policy viewpoint seem to be the product of a cabal.

It's the old Ad Hominem argument dressed up in fancy rhetoric.

I am a Catholic, Texan, pro-Bush, pro-War-on-Terror, pro-liberation-of-Iraq, anti-Communist, anti-Islamofascist-Jihadist, pro-freedom-oriented-foreign-policy, pro-traditional-values, small Government Conservative. Who happens to think Paul Wolfowitz would be ten times better as Secty of State than Colin Powell.... Am I a "neo-con"?

196 posted on 09/28/2003 8:45:37 PM PDT by WOSG (DONT PUT CALI ON CRUZ CONTROL & VOTE YES ON 54!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies ]

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