January 16, 200521 yr Bush is not a "neo-con". There's nothing new about cutting taxes and having a strong national defense. Neo-conservatism is a myth. Nothing anything Bush stands for is new. It seems like liberals just group all Republicans they don't like into the "neo-con" category, and try to make it sound evil.
January 16, 200521 yr Author Bush is not a "neo-con".? There's nothing new about cutting taxes and having a strong national defense.? Neo-conservatism is a myth.? Nothing anything Bush stands for is new.? It seems like liberals just group all Republicans they don't like into the "neo-con" category, and try to make it sound evil. 657001[/snapback] The presence of the federal defecit during his tenure along with his willingness to add an amendment to the Constitution suggests otherwise.
January 16, 200521 yr Moral issues didn't decide the election as much as national security did as Dick Morris has said. Rudy supports strong national security and lower taxes, two issues that unite Republicans. 655819[/snapback] Dick Morris said it... It must be true. :plain Do I have to bring up his column for early in the summer which he stated Kerry was on the verge of losing the election by double digits again?
January 16, 200521 yr Sorry, but neo-conservatism is all too real. The name itself is just a cover for what it really means, which is "far-right wing". Mark my words, the Republican party will be a mess by the end of Bush's second term, because there will be a split between those loyal to the president, and the true Republicans.
January 16, 200521 yr Sorry, but neo-conservatism is all too real. The name itself is just a cover for what it really means, which is "far-right wing". Mark my words, the Republican party will be a mess by the end of Bush's second term, because there will be a split between those loyal to the president, and the true Republicans. 657184[/snapback] That's what I've said to my dad, a few weeks back. Pat Buchanan was the first example, The split is inevitable because you're not going to have half the party for Oursourcing and Immigration and the other half against it and expect them to be one happy family.
January 18, 200521 yr Buchannon voted for Kerry this year, don't know if anybody saw him say that as guest host on Scarborough a few weeks ago. But Neo-Cons are true. But us Democrats aren't vicious liers like Conservatives. The Repubs label any Democrat not named Zell Miller things like... "Liberal" "Left Winger" "Socialist" "Marxist" "Ultra Liberal" "Out of touch with the mainstream" "Communist" "Immoral" "Treasonous" "Slanderous" "Libelous" "Unpatriotic" "Weak on defense" "Tax and Spend Liberal" So with all the labels the Cons, and I just call them Cons cuz thats what they are float out there and then use in the campaigns. Us Dem's have no way of responding too and defeating all of those untrue labels. Problem is the Democrats just don't lie and cheat as well as the Republicans do.
January 19, 200521 yr Sorry, but neo-conservatism is all too real. The name itself is just a cover for what it really means, which is "far-right wing". Mark my words, the Republican party will be a mess by the end of Bush's second term, because there will be a split between those loyal to the president, and the true Republicans. 657184[/snapback] That's what I've said to my dad, a few weeks back. Pat Buchanan was the first example, The split is inevitable because you're not going to have half the party for Oursourcing and Immigration and the other half against it and expect them to be one happy family. 657190[/snapback] Actually, Buchanan is defintely not a neocon. And FutureGm i have to ctach you on an error again. A neo con is actually not right wing at all!!!! A neocon is a person who applies leftist practices of govt control to social issues. Heres a good link: http://www.marlinbaseball.com/forums/index...showtopic=36014 Many of you here is confused on what a neocon is and this post which was ignored by many except f_m, tonyi, and orisha, is a very good in depth explanation of the cancer which is the neocons. And yes they are very real, but they are not what most ppl think
January 19, 200521 yr Thanks for the link and good read LoC. And no, I'm not being sarcastic since you'll probably ask.
January 19, 200521 yr Thanks for the link and good read LoC. And no, I'm not being sarcastic since you'll probably ask. 659778[/snapback] lol you guessed right
January 20, 200521 yr I dont like to single people out but i want a response from futuregm about neocons. Hes the reason i posted that statement i nthe first place since its his definition of neocons thats consistently incorrect
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.