Perhaps you would like a mirror?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoconservative
It's all right there.
The Liberal's Go To Guy, John McCain
Discussion in 'Political Debate & Discussion' started by carpro, Jan 30, 2008.
Page 4 of 6
-
-
As for Hannity's hate hotline, only a Hannity listener would know what this is. Does this mean you listen to Sean Hannity? I wouldn't want to simply assume you are, but that would certainly make sense. -
First it was Bob Dole, now you are introducing the term "Neo-Nazi" into this discussion (which also has no place here).
Would it be possible to stick to the subject at hand? -
Revmitchell Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
-
You didn't answer my question, by the way. -
Revmitchell Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
-
-
Revmitchell Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
-
Two great sources will require you to go to your public library.
Read Leo Strauss and the Politics of American Empire, by Anne Norton
Or you could read On the Democratic Idea in America, by Irving Kristol
I would loan you my copies but I am in Virginia.
And you still didn't answer my question. I guess we will never really know. If you do listen to Hannity, it makes sense that you would think that McCain is a liberal though.
Perhaps you want the unbiased [long pause................................... :laugh:] opinion of conservapedia
http://www.conservapedia.com/Neoconservative
Sorry: I can't stop laughing..... -
-
Figures.
Amongst the definitions I have studied, it is the most simplistic and shallow.
If you study it in a little more depth than wikipedia, you'll find that President John Kennedy was one of the very first neocons. -
This is EXACTLY why I can't stand to post here.
-
-
777 said:This is EXACTLY why I can't stand to post here.Click to expand...
What does he [Sean Hannity] have to do with it, need a mirror?Click to expand...
Oh, and you don't tell me what to do, ever.Click to expand...
Got it, lib?Click to expand...
I guess we are dealing with a maturity factor. You are right here though, I am indeed a LIBERAL. At least you got that right. -
carpro said:The wikipedia definition is the one you want to go with?
Figures.
Amongst the definitions I have studied, it is the most simplistic and shallow.Click to expand...
If you have indeed "studied" neoconservatism (and please note that "studied" was your word, not mine), then you would know that McCain is a Neocon.
If you study it in a little more depth than wikipedia, you'll find that President John Kennedy was one of the very first neocons.Click to expand...
Wow: this should come as quite a surprise to Irving Kristol and Leo Strauss. -
Baptist in Richmond said:AND YET, you grace us with these new albeit unrelated topics.Click to expand...
Baptist in Richmond said:Perhaps you are having diffuculty with reading comprehension. If you will noticed, I ASKED you, I didn't tell you. You even did me the favor of reproducing my question for me.Click to expand...
Perhaps you still have a problem with basic manners.
Baptist in Richmond said:Is this a threat? Hmmmm......Click to expand...
Baptist in Richmond said:I guess we are dealing with a maturity factor. You are right here though, I am indeed a LIBERAL. At least you got that right.Click to expand...
A NEOLIB you mean. :flower:
Forever. Laterz, NEOLIB
[/ignore] -
Baptist in Richmond said::eek:
Wow: this should come as quite a surprise to Irving Kristol and Leo Strauss.Click to expand...
John Kennedy was indeed one of this country's first neocons.
Liberal
anti communist
tax cutter
believed in the projection of military might
believed it was America's responsibility to advance the cause of freedom throughout the world
John McCain is not a neocon. He just doesn't fit the profile. Kennedy does.
It all illustrates the pitfalls of labeling. You use "neocon" as a prejorative. That's the only reason the term appeals to you.
You can't define neocon and you certainly have avoided telling us why you think McCain is one. -
777 said:Who's "us"? You can't even seem to understand that I don't care what you think a "neocon" is. It's a slur, so you like it.Click to expand...
Perhaps you still have a problem with basic manners.Click to expand...
No, but you're probably are whining that it's one to the moderators here.Click to expand...
And you still don't what you're talking about.Click to expand...
A NEOLIB you mean. :flower:
Forever. Laterz, NEOLIB
[/ignore]Click to expand...
Your posts really do say more about you than they do about me...... -
Wasn't 777 banned for this type of behavior before?
-
carpro said:John Kennedy was indeed one of this country's first neocons.Click to expand...
It all illustrates the pitfalls of labeling. You use "neocon" as a prejorative. That's the only reason the term appeals to you.Click to expand...
You can't define neocon and you certainly have avoided telling us why you think McCain is one.Click to expand...
By chance, did you look at the article at conservapedia?
[Long pause.................................................. :laugh:]
Conservapedia is proof that anyone can put anything out on the internet.
The author of this article is either:
1. WOEFULLY ignorant and/or inept
2. Deliberately attempting to mislead the reader.
Go down to the bottom of the page and look at the "sources" that are listed.
Pay close attention to number two. It reads:
Neoconservatives might be expected to back John McCain, but they do not -- most likely because McCain has little need or use for neoconservatives and thus they cannot expect to obtain top positions in a McCain Administration.Click to expand...
Here is an article from azcentral.com from August 11, 2006:
http://www.azcentral.com/news/election/special3/articles/0811mccain-advisers-ON.html
Read the article, and pay close attention to the list of McCain's advisors at the bottom.
Under "Foreign Policy," the list includes William Kristol, Robert Kagan, Robert Zoellick, Richard Armitage and Eliot Cohen, among others. Kristol and Kagan are identified as Neocons in the article at conservapedia!
I am inclined to believe that this is a result of woeful ignorance/ineptitude, but I cannot rule out a deliberate attempt to mislead. Either way, this shows that conservapedia has neither credibility nor objectivity. If you read the article on the Neoconservatives at wikipedia, it is arguably more balanced and clearly more accurate.
Now, if McCain is not a Neocon, as you seemingly claim, why have some of the heavyweights from the Neocon camp joined his campaign as advisors?
Page 4 of 6