"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
John H wrote:
On Wed, 23 Jun 2004 14:34:47 -0400, DSK wrote:

John H wrote:
Any conservative who *was* a liberal *is* a neoconservative. Why is
Webster not
sufficient as a source any longer?

So, if this definition is correct, then Bush & Cheney not to mention
Wolfowitz etc etc all *used* to be liberals?

Interesting. When was this, exactly?

DSK

Doug, I didn't make up the definition. Go he


http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionar...ve&x=10 &y=13

I have no reason to think the dictionary got it wrong. If Bush, et al,
are
neoconservatives, then, by definition, they were former liberals who are
now
espousing political conservatism.

If they are not former liberals, then they are not neoconservatives, by
definition.


John H

On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD
on the beautiful Chesapeake Bay!


What you are is an intellectually lazy, simple-minded fool.


Attacking the messenger again rather than supporting, with facts, your
arguments.

"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...
It was even simpler than that. I just applied a chain of simple logic
based on the definitions previously provided. If "neo" is new, then if
someone is a "neo"conservative, that implies that they were
previously something else. The most common "other" ideology would be a
liberal. Therefore, a "new" conservative would most likely be an "old"
liberal.

Binary thinking at its finest. Only two possibilities to consider.

The great supporter of the gray areas in between. Either you are pregnant or
you are not pregnant, you can't be a little pregnant it is physically
impossible.

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
Dave Hall wrote:
On 23 Jun 2004 15:22:13 GMT, (Gould 0738) wrote:

It was even simpler than that. I just applied a chain of simple logic
based on the definitions previously provided. If "neo" is new, then if
someone is a "neo"conservative, that implies that they were
previously something else. The most common "other" ideology would be a
liberal. Therefore, a "new" conservative would most likely be an "old"
liberal.

Binary thinking at its finest. Only two possibilities to consider.


Sometimes that's all there is. Are you familiar with Occam's razor?


Dave



I am. Old William called for a minimum number of points *necessary*. For
issues as complex as a worldwide Islamist insurgency, black or white
ain't enough.

Sure it is. If you are an infidel you must convert to Islam or die by the
Islamic sword. Simple, black and white and binary.

For a couple of good reasons.

1) Many of the people who describe themselves as "neoconservatives" have never
been liberals.

2) Other dictionaries disagree with MW.


Nothing gets the rocks off like a fantasy that liberals are going over to your
side in droves, I know, but that's not what the term
means in US politics.

In fact, why
don't we use the definition that m-w.com has for neoconservative just to
make it easier for everyone to stay on the same page.

Bert Robbins wrote:
"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...
Please Chuckie, whats your definition of a neocon?

(Since you asked)

Rather than a person who is newly conservative, (which a neocon may or may
not
be), a neocon is a person who subscribes to the "new" conservatism.

The new conseratism is a black vs. white philosophy. All things are either
very
good, or very wicked. The new conservatism, like all philosophies, defines
its
own values as the "very good" values and all others as the "very wicked".
All
values are extreme in neoconservatism. The Commander in Chief (they seldom
refer to him anymore as the president) is God's Chosen Leader for the
American
People, and those who oppose or even question Him are aiding and abetting
our
rapidly increasing number of enemies.

Limbaugh, Hannity, Coulter, Savage, and others epitomize the voices of
neoconservatism. It is a narrow minded and hateful, self congratulatory
and
autovindicated system of belief.

However, before all four conservatives who will even bother to read this
pick
up the nearest flame-thrower and come back with the moral-equivalency
excuses
about liberals do this, this, and this.......

Not all conservatives are neocons. There are a handful of traditional
conservatives left in the world. The traditional conservatives are shocked
at
the current size of the federal government and the dismal state of
government
fiscal affairs. The traditional conservatives respect dissent,
(recognizing
that at times it is their own voices that will be those of dissent, rather
than
majority) and are not trapped by binary thinking. I have a very high
regard for
traditonal, thoughtful, contemplative, rational conservatives.

The neo con says, "You're either with me, or against me!" The traditional
conservative says, "We either agree, or we need to work out a solution
that
will be at least somewhat acceptable to all sides. It could be that
neither of
us is *absolutely* right, and that there is more truth in the middle than
on
either extreme."

So, no. A neocon isn't somebody who "used to be a liberal but saw the
light".
(That's a fairly binary concept, that all people are either liberal or
conservative, anyway). A neocon is a binary thinker who used to be a
liberal,
moderate, or traditional conservative but who has been blinded by the
propaganda and bulldung. Not exactly the same thing. :-)

(You asked)

I am going to have to toss your definition by the side due to the fact that
it is more a political diatribe than a definition of a word. In fact, why
don't we use the definition that m-w.com has for neoconservative just to
make it easier for everyone to stay on the same page.

http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionar...eoconservative

Main Entry: neo·con·ser·va·tive
Pronunciation: -k&n-'s&r-v&-tiv
Function: noun
: a former liberal espousing political conservatism
- neo·con·ser·va·tism /-v&-"ti-z&m/ noun
- neoconservative adjective



Because that an absurd definition, and doesn;t describe the assholes who
are the current-day neocons, that's why.

But nice try.

Bert Robbins wrote:

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
John H wrote:
On Wed, 23 Jun 2004 14:34:47 -0400, DSK wrote:

John H wrote:
Any conservative who *was* a liberal *is* a neoconservative. Why is
Webster not
sufficient as a source any longer?

So, if this definition is correct, then Bush & Cheney not to mention
Wolfowitz etc etc all *used* to be liberals?

Interesting. When was this, exactly?

DSK

Doug, I didn't make up the definition. Go he


http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionar...ve&x=10 &y=13

I have no reason to think the dictionary got it wrong. If Bush, et al,
are
neoconservatives, then, by definition, they were former liberals who are
now
espousing political conservatism.

If they are not former liberals, then they are not neoconservatives, by
definition.


John H

On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD
on the beautiful Chesapeake Bay!


What you are is an intellectually lazy, simple-minded fool.


Attacking the messenger again rather than supporting, with facts, your
arguments.



Go pee up a rope, Poop.

Gould 0738 wrote:

For a couple of good reasons.

1) Many of the people who describe themselves as "neoconservatives" have never
been liberals.

2) Other dictionaries disagree with MW.


Nothing gets the rocks off like a fantasy that liberals are going over to your
side in droves, I know, but that's not what the term
means in US politics.

In fact, why
don't we use the definition that m-w.com has for neoconservative just to
make it easier for everyone to stay on the same page.




Neocons...it's what's for lunch this fall.

The great supporter of the gray areas in between. Either you are pregnant or
you are not pregnant, you can't be a little pregnant it is physically
impossible.

There is more to life than pregnancy.

Here's a link supporting my assertion that
neoconservatism is a belief system, not
a resume' of previous political leanings.

http://www.newamericancentury.org/iraq-20030724.htm


Here's a link to a point on the PNAC website where they run an article
describing their group as the "primary advocacy group for neoconservatism".
Once again, belief rather than previous political affiliation

http://www.newamericancentury.org/defense-20040325.htm


And finally, here is the political biography of William Kristol, a
self-described neo conservative (wrote a book extolling the "neoconservative
imagination") and one of the founders of the PNAC. No liberal priors, sorry:


William Kristol
William Kristol is editor of The Weekly Standard, as well as chairman and
co-founder of the Project for the New American Century. Before starting the
Weekly Standard in 1995, Mr. Kristol led the Project for the Republican Future,
where he helped shape the strategy that produced the 1994 Republican
congressional victory. Prior to that, Mr. Kristol served as chief of staff to
Vice President Dan Quayle during the first Bush Administration. From 1985 to
1988, he served as chief of staff and counselor to Secretary of Education
William Bennett. Prior to coming to Washington, Mr. Kristol served on the
faculty of Harvard University's Kennedy School of Government (1983-1985) and
the Department of Political Science at the University of Pennsylvania
(1979-1983).

Mr. Kristol has published numerous articles and essays on topics including
constitutional law, political philosophy, and public policy, and has co-edited
several books, including The Neoconservative Imagination (with Christopher
DeMuth, 1995), Educating the Prince: Essays in Honor of Harvey Mansfield (with
Mark Blitz, 2000), Present Dangers (with Robert Kagan, 2000), Bush v. Go The
Court Cases and the Commentary (with E. J. Dionne, Jr., 2001), and The Future
is Now: American Confronts the New Genetics (with Eric Cohen, 2002). He is the
co-author, with Lawrence Kaplan, of the best-selling book The War Over Iraq.
Widely recognized as one of the nation's leading political analysts and
commentators, Mr. Kristol regularly appears on Fox News Channel. He serves on
the boards of the Manhattan Institute, the John M. Ashbrook Center for Public
Affairs, and the Shalem Foundation.

Mr. Kristol received both his A.B. (1973) and Ph.D. (1979) from Harvard
University. Married with three children, he currently resides in bucolic
McLean, Virginia.

************

Mr. Kristol would proably be very amused to learn that the dictionary won't let
him be a neoconservative because he was never a liberal.

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
Bert Robbins wrote:

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
John H wrote:
On Wed, 23 Jun 2004 14:34:47 -0400, DSK wrote:

John H wrote:
Any conservative who *was* a liberal *is* a neoconservative. Why is
Webster not
sufficient as a source any longer?

So, if this definition is correct, then Bush & Cheney not to mention
Wolfowitz etc etc all *used* to be liberals?

Interesting. When was this, exactly?

DSK

Doug, I didn't make up the definition. Go he



http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionar...ve&x=10 &y=13

I have no reason to think the dictionary got it wrong. If Bush, et
al,
are
neoconservatives, then, by definition, they were former liberals who
are
now
espousing political conservatism.

If they are not former liberals, then they are not neoconservatives,
by
definition.


John H

On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD
on the beautiful Chesapeake Bay!


What you are is an intellectually lazy, simple-minded fool.


Attacking the messenger again rather than supporting, with facts, your
arguments.



Go pee up a rope, Poop.

I see the ghost writer is off duty.

Gould,

It is unfortunate that you have chosen the path of feeding trolls, and
posting off-topic.

I always thought you had good input on boating related threads, but my
rules, are my rules...

*ploink*

--
-Netsock

"It's just about going fast...that's all..."
http://home.insight.rr.com/cgreen/

"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...
For a couple of good reasons.

1) Many of the people who describe themselves as "neoconservatives" have
never
been liberals.

2) Other dictionaries disagree with MW.


Nothing gets the rocks off like a fantasy that liberals are going over to
your
side in droves, I know, but that's not what the term
means in US politics.

In fact, why
don't we use the definition that m-w.com has for neoconservative just to
make it easier for everyone to stay on the same page.