Replies

Interesting thread. If you scrolled through it, you would see, there is many different variations of what a neocon actually is. But one thing is consistent throughout, neocons are former liberals, who have embraced certain aspects of political conservatism. I'm not generally fond of neo-cons. I detest their overzealous foreign policy agenda and their desire for an activist role for the Republican Party, in Washington DC politics. They don't seem to have a great concern about the fraud, waste and abuse that exists throughout the federal budget and in every government department, program and agency.

I just don't like attacks against neocons, being overplayed and portrayed as an attack on all conservative-republicans. I believe this is done by the liberal media and many on the far right, and is detrimental to the Republican Party's ability to fashion and promote a unified front, against the Democratic Party and its liberal base. Such fractional politics is undermining conservative efforts to hold onto power in Wash-DC. Many on the political rightwing, better wakeup and smell the coffee, before its too late.

Sorry if you have already pointed out most of DiLorenzo's fallacies, errors of fact, and baseless assertions in this article. I just found this thread, and haven't the time right now to read it. I just want to point out that this:

For example, in Keyes’s article he bases his argument in support of federal drug regulation on the equality principle of the Declaration.

is typical DiLorenzo incapacity to read. The article by Keyes has no defense of the Constitutionality of federal drug regulation law. It is about the propriety of the Attorney General basing his obligatory interpretation of existing federal law (unless we want him to simply pass his own judgment on the constitutionality of each federal law) on state referenda or on some more national principle, particularly when the verdict of the state referendum contradicts the most fundamental principle of federal law. Keyes' opinion on the constitutionality of federal drug law is simply absent from this article.

There are plenty of other, more obvious, errors in the article. But seeing this one depends on having read the Keyes article -- because as usual you can't trust DiLorenzo to honestly report the views of those he disagrees with.