Feb
7
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means
February 7, 2008 | 1 Comment
Chalk this up to misuse of the term neocon, number 56895688346738966789:
Sign Of The Apocalypse #28: neo con crazies attack Senator McCain for “not being conservative enough”.
Umm, dude, you do realize that neoconservatives are generally the most vocal conservative supporters of John McCain? Just view the pages of the Weekly Standard where Bill Kristol and company have been McCain’s most prominent boosters. As champions of foreign policy first, everything else second, it is precisely “neo con crazies” who make up the McCain constituency on the right.
Yes, I recognize that I am criticizing someone writing on an internet wrestling message board. But it does provide a nice teaching moment. After all, though the term neocon is probably the second-most misused word in our political lexicon (with the term liberal as applied to the modern ideologues of the Democratic party being first), there are, in fact, real live neocons, and they do in fact differ from traditional conservatives in some important ways. I am just as tired as most when I see the term being applied to just about anyone who supports the Iraq War. It signifies the complete intellectual poverty of the person using the word, and this case is no different. So it’s important that we recognize the distinction between neocons and traditional conservatives, though I suppose that might be too much to ask of people who have spent about ten minutes of their lives reading up on the issues.
Next thing we’ll hear is that neocons are bad because they promote foreiogn policy realism, though I can’t imagine anyone politically ignorant to make that claim. Right?
No TagComments
1 Comment so far
“Next thing we’ll hear is that neocons are bad because they promote foreign policy realism, though I can’t imagine anyone politically ignorant to make that claim. Right?”
Nobody could be that ignorant, right Mark? Mark?