Truth is the neocon's wooden stake

Taichiliberal said:
Amen....and that's a sad state of affairs....time to change that, don't you think? Weiner called it right.
Click to expand...

I will say that the SCOTUS claiming that corporations are protected as individuals under the 14th Amendment is an absolute joke and retarded beyond belief.
 
Taichiliberal said:
Spout all the BS you want, Southie....the thread shows you for the neocon BS artist that you are...you don't even have the stones (or the brains) to address what Weiner said beyond the automatic gain saying that is so common of the Party of No.
Click to expand...
Libby I'm still waiting for you to explain to me who exactly these 'neocon' bogeymen are. I probably asked that the first time that you posted months ago and I still haven't received a reasonable answer. You are like Don Quixote swinging a sword at windmills here. Until we get past that there's really nothing more to discuss. :cof1:
 
Taichiliberal said:
Really? Because last time I checked, the Teabaggers are getting all the hype coverage from Fox Noise, the WND, NewsMax, Michelle Malkin, Crowley, Hannity, etc. And dead eye Dick Cheney and Gingrich are still running around like they have credibility.
Click to expand...
TEA Party protests have nothing to do with neocons. You are foolish enough to believe that whomever you disagree with is a "neocon"...
 
Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
Amen....and that's a sad state of affairs....time to change that, don't you think? Weiner called it right.
Click to expand...

Threedee said:
I will say that the SCOTUS claiming that corporations are protected as individuals under the 14th Amendment is an absolute joke and retarded beyond belief.
Click to expand...

But not unexpected, especially when you look at who voted and their reasons. Hell, even John McCain recognized that campaign funding reform would go a long way in making politicians honest...and the SCOTUS decision just put the kibosh on that idea for a long while. Now, someone should ask Weiner about his Democratic bretheren who voted along with the GOP on healthcare, and see if they get the same vitrol. But still, his statements in light of recent history were on target.
 
Southern Man said:
Libby I'm still waiting for you to explain to me who exactly these 'neocon' bogeymen are (funny, but I seem to recall YOU babbling some BS about how neocon was not a description of the new conservative bent of the GOP and it's supporters, but was a racial slur against Jewish conservative Republicans. Now you're saying there's no such thing. :palm: Get your act together Southie.) I probably asked that the first time that you posted months ago and I still haven't received a reasonable answer. You are like Don Quixote swinging a sword at windmills here. Until we get past that there's really nothing more to discuss. :cof1:
Click to expand...

You still think that trying to change the subject is a clever ploy? Wake up, it's not! Every blessed time you neocons can't handle the truth about your party's actions, you try to change the subject by avoiding discussion of the title subject and pushing your own "question" as paramount.

Sorry chuckles, but you just can't have your way. If you think there is no such thing as "new conservatives" ("neocons" for short), that's your problem. If you can't/won't discuss what Weiner accurately pointed out on the House floor, then that's your intellectual cowardice shinning through.
 
Originally Posted by Damocles
Thankfully "neocon" is a rare breed and it is already endangered.
Click to expand...

PostmodernProphet said:
hardly...since the definition of "neocon" is "those liberals hate", neocons will always be with us......
Click to expand...

:palm: Try having a little knowledge of something before your fingers hit the keys...makes you look less foolish.

Neoconservative

1 : a former liberal espousing political conservatism
2 : a conservative who advocates the assertive promotion of democracy and United States national interest in international affairs including through military means
(Merriam-Webster)

Now, that being said....do you have anything to say about Weiner's statement's on the House floor?
 
Damocles said:
TEA Party protests have nothing to do with neocons. That is your opinion. Given the myriad of statements from various teabaggers, other than being anti-Obama one would be hard pressed to say exactly how far their conservatism goes. But make no mistake, there's nothing "liberal" about their backers, promoters and the vast majority of the members. New conservatism is an apt description of them. You are foolish enough to believe that whomever you disagree with is a "neocon"...
Click to expand...

Untrue.....I'm very specific as to whom I label a neocon and why...given the circumstance at the time. If you're silly enough to think otherwise given the chronology of the posts, that's your problem, not mine.
 
First you say this:
That is your opinion. Given the myriad of statements from various teabaggers, other than being anti-Obama one would be hard pressed to say exactly how far their conservatism goes. But make no mistake, there's nothing "liberal" about their backers, promoters and the vast majority of the members. New conservatism is an apt description of them.
Click to expand...
(bolding is mine)

Then this:
Taichiliberal said:
Untrue.....I'm very specific as to whom I label a neocon and why...given the circumstance at the time. If you're silly enough to think otherwise given the chronology of the posts, that's your problem, not mine.
Click to expand...

your first portion of your post belies what you say here, in that portion you say that "nothing liberal" is all that it takes. That simply because of that assessment "new conservative" fits. Then in the next you say you are specific. You aren't.

You simply label anybody who you disagree with to be "neocon" because it is the word of the day. Neocons are rare, and thankfully so.
 
Damocles said:
First you say this:

(bolding is mine)

Then this:


your first portion of your post belies what you say here, in that portion you say that "nothing liberal" is all that it takes. That simply because of that assessment "new conservative" fits. Then in the next you say you are specific. You aren't.

You simply label anybody who you disagree with to be "neocon" because it is the word of the day. Neocons are rare, and thankfully so.
Click to expand...

Nope. to be a neocon you have to simply put both globalization zealotry and israel above the well being of the american people. Many more democrats actually qualify than realize it.
 
Taichiliberal said:
:palm: Try having a little knowledge of something before your fingers hit the keys...makes you look less foolish.

Neoconservative

1 : a former liberal espousing political conservatism
2 : a conservative who advocates the assertive promotion of democracy and United States national interest in international affairs including through military means
(Merriam-Webster)

Now, that being said....do you have anything to say about Weiner's statement's on the House floor?
Click to expand...

Neither of those definitions are accurate at all. Many of the founders of the New Right were members of the Old Left. They were not neoliberals at all.

As for foreign policy (and this is where Asshate gets it half right), neoconservatives tend to have a foreign policy that is not merely assertive of democracy, but is wrapped around Israeli interests.
 
AssHatZombie said:
Nope. to be a neocon you have to simply put both globalization zealotry and israel above the well being of the american people. Many more democrats actually qualify than realize it.
Click to expand...

Israel, yes, but globalization zealotry is adhered to by all intelligent, rational people.
 
Taichiliberal said:
You still think that trying to change the subject is a clever ploy? Wake up, it's not! Every blessed time you neocons can't handle the truth about your party's actions, you try to change the subject by avoiding discussion of the title subject and pushing your own "question" as paramount.

Sorry chuckles, but you just can't have your way. If you think there is no such thing as "new conservatives" ("neocons" for short), that's your problem. If you can't/won't discuss what Weiner accurately pointed out on the House floor, then that's your intellectual cowardice shinning through.
Click to expand...

To some it is a racial slur, and there is no one who identifies themselves as a "neocon".

With regards to "changing the subject", look at the title of the thread that you started: " Truth is the neocon's wooden stake". I'm sticking right on the subject, your insistence on vilifying some boogieman that doesn't exist, like a vampire that must be killed by driving an oak stake through its heart. :lol:
 
Southern Man said:
To some it is a racial slur, and there is no one who identifies themselves as a "neocon".

With regards to "changing the subject", look at the title of the thread that you started: " Truth is the neocon's wooden stake". I'm sticking right on the subject, your insistence on vilifying some boogieman that doesn't exist, like a vampire that must be killed by driving an oak stake through its heart. :lol:
Click to expand...

They don't call themselves neocons, because they don't want to define it from traditional america-first conservatism.

Conservative is not decimating the lives of your citizenry with absurd trade policy, that's strictly neocon progressivism.
 
Taichiliberal said:
Here's New York Rep. Anthony Weiner putting it all in no-uncertain-terms regarding GOP opposition to healthcare reform. This guy has been tireless in pushing for the single payer option, and not being afraid to challenge those in his own party as well:

Weiner Offends The GOP On House Floor: You’re All ‘Owned’ By The ‘Insurance Industry’!


http://thinkprogress.org/2010/02/24/anthony-weiner-subsidiary/
Click to expand...

http://www.opensecrets.org/industries/indus.php?ind=F09

It would seem BOTH parties are in the pockets of the insurance companies....

With the majority of contributions coming to the party that happens to be in power at the time.
 
Threedee said:
Good business means making money.
Click to expand...

Not to the detriment of society in general though. That's why kiddie porn is illegal too.

ANd when we're discussing national policy it must consider the betterment of all citizens, not just consider how rich people want to shape society to guarantee the perpetuation of their personal fortunes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top