The Neo-Cons Strike Back

[kalm]

Against Rand Paul. Reading conservative thoughts regarding foreign policy on this board would suggest most conks agree more with Paul's non-interventionist view than the neo-cons. Is this a case of retribution for Paul breaking ranks and criticizing fellow Republicans or is military adventurism still sellable to the conservative establishment? Will Paul's primary opponents try to define him as a dove?

In a Monday op-ed, Wall Street Journal columnist Bret Stephens offers the tongue-in-cheek suggestion that Paul is the perfect candidate for the GOP in 2016 -- "because maybe what the GOP needs is another humbling landslide defeat."

Stephens argues that Paul's foreign policy views and his former aide's pro-Confederate ties are more problematic than potential 2016 rival Jeb Bush's stance on immigration and education or Chris Christie's role in the Bridgegate scandal.

"When moderation on a subject like immigration is ideologically disqualifying, but bark-at-the-moon lunacy about Halliburton is not, then the party has worse problems than merely its choice of nominee," he writes.

National Review editor Rich Lowry gave a similar take on Tuesday, chiding Paul's "dewy-eyed foolishness" and "blame-America-first libertarianism."

"[Paul's] instincts sometimes seem more appropriate to a dorm-room bull session than the Situation Room," Lowry writes. "The default position of the GOP is still toward strength, and the party will instinctively recoil from the distorted view of America implicit in some of Paul’s more impolitic statements."

Lowry points to Paul's positions on recent conflicts in Syria and Ukraine as proof the libertarian-leaning senator is out of step with his party.

"Rand Paul is running in a party that, while chastened on foreign policy, still has a hawkish reflex — and not because it is beholden to Halliburton," he writes.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/04/1 ... 55883.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[CID1990]

Against Rand Paul. Reading conservative thoughts regarding foreign policy on this board would suggest most conks agree more with Paul's non-interventionist view than the neo-cons. Is this a case of retribution for Paul breaking ranks and criticizing fellow Republicans or is military adventurism still sellable to the conservative establishment? Will Paul's primary opponents try to define him as a dove?

How is this news? Libertarians and the neocons are on opposite ends of the spectrum when it comes to foreign policy and always have been.

And you need to go develop a better understanding of the Neoconservative movement. It is purely foreign policy focused and has its roots in the Democrat left- and a number of ideological adherents currently on the left.... Hillary Clinton is as neoconservative as it gets on foreign policy.

Seeing neoconservative and immediately thinking Republican is about as ignorant as it gets- the Bush administration notwithstanding.

[OL FU]

NeoCon = Big Government Conservative

[kalm]

Against Rand Paul. Reading conservative thoughts regarding foreign policy on this board would suggest most conks agree more with Paul's non-interventionist view than the neo-cons. Is this a case of retribution for Paul breaking ranks and criticizing fellow Republicans or is military adventurism still sellable to the conservative establishment? Will Paul's primary opponents try to define him as a dove?

How is this news? Libertarians and the neocons are on opposite ends of the spectrum when it comes to foreign policy and always have been.

And you need to go develop a better understanding of the Neoconservative movement. It is purely foreign policy focused and has its roots in the Democrat left- and a number of ideological adherents currently on the left.... Hillary Clinton is as neoconservative as it gets on foreign policy.

Seeing neoconservative and immediately thinking Republican is about as ignorant as it gets- the Bush administration notwithstanding.

Oh that's right, I forgot...

[kalm]

NeoCon = Big Government Conservative

Accuracy. And it's about half of the Republican Party.

[Ivytalk]

"Establishment" Republicans are uncomfortable with Paul for more reasons than his foreign policy views -- although his father was more deserving of the "isolationist" tag than Rand. He's a political neophyte, just like Obama was, and he's made some unfortunate remarks (i.e. about the Civil Rights Act of 1964) that were misconstrued but got him into some trouble. Paul beat an establishment Republican in his first Senate primary, which didn't endear him to party regulars. Paul is pro-life and is a fiscal conservative. He is trying to "broaden the base" of the GOP by getting more young people involved. I don't share the view that nominating him would result in an electoral disaster of Goldwater proportions. That said, I want to know more about him.

[OL FU]

"Establishment" Republicans are uncomfortable with Paul for more reasons than his foreign policy views -- although his father was more deserving of the "isolationist" tag than Rand. He's a political neophyte, just like Obama was, and he's made some unfortunate remarks (i.e. about the Civil Rights Act of 1964) that were misconstrued but got him into some trouble. Paul beat an establishment Republican in his first Senate primary, which didn't endear him to party regulars. Paul is pro-life and is a fiscal conservative. He is trying to "broaden the base" of the GOP by getting more young people involved. I don't share the view that nominating him would result in an electoral disaster of Goldwater proportions. That said, I want to know more about him.

This

I can tell people all day long that I lean to the libertarian side, but real hardcore libertarians kinda sorta scare the shit out of me

[Baldy]

"Establishment" Republicans are uncomfortable with Paul for more reasons than his foreign policy views -- although his father was more deserving of the "isolationist" tag than Rand. He's a political neophyte, just like Obama was, and he's made some unfortunate remarks (i.e. about the Civil Rights Act of 1964) that were misconstrued but got him into some trouble. Paul beat an establishment Republican in his first Senate primary, which didn't endear him to party regulars. Paul is pro-life and is a fiscal conservative. He is trying to "broaden the base" of the GOP by getting more young people involved. I don't share the view that nominating him would result in an electoral disaster of Goldwater proportions. That said, I want to know more about him.

This

I can tell people all day long that I lean to the libertarian side, but real hardcore libertarians kinda sorta scare the shit out of me

[89Hen]

real hardcore libertarians kinda sorta scare the shit out of me

And they should.

[AZGrizFan]

"Establishment" Republicans are uncomfortable with Paul for more reasons than his foreign policy views -- although his father was more deserving of the "isolationist" tag than Rand. He's a political neophyte, just like Obama was, and he's made some unfortunate remarks (i.e. about the Civil Rights Act of 1964) that were misconstrued but got him into some trouble. Paul beat an establishment Republican in his first Senate primary, which didn't endear him to party regulars. Paul is pro-life and is a fiscal conservative. He is trying to "broaden the base" of the GOP by getting more young people involved. I don't share the view that nominating him would result in an electoral disaster of Goldwater proportions. That said, I want to know more about him.

That's all I need to know, and all I really care about. The "isolationism" crap is just more political fodder (like making abortion illegal) that ain't gonna happen but is used to rally the base of the opponent.

[Chizzang]

That's all I need to know, and all I really care about. The "isolationism" crap is just more political fodder (like making abortion illegal) that ain't gonna happen but is used to rally the base of the opponent.

True words...
But is Randy Paul a Libertarian version of Obama..?
A guy who will say anything to get elected - fool his core - and sway just enough of the middle to win
and then hit the switch and be a regular old POLITICIAN / Same old / Same old

I wonder..?

[AZGrizFan]

That's all I need to know, and all I really care about. The "isolationism" crap is just more political fodder (like making abortion illegal) that ain't gonna happen but is used to rally the base of the opponent.

True words...
But is Randy Paul a Libertarian version of Obama..?
A guy who will say anything to get elected - fool his core - and sway just enough of the middle to win
and then hit the switch and be a regular old POLITICIAN / Same old / Same old

I wonder..?

Well, I'm going to assume YES until I actually see one that acts otherwise. Much like Bigfoot, those type of politicians are rumored to exist, just hasn't been unequivocally verified as of this writing.

[CID1990]

NeoCon = Big Government Conservative

Accuracy. And it's about half of the Republican Party.

FU is half correct.

Klam as usual is off the reservation. Source that half the Republican Party are scions of Leo Strauss and Daniel Patrick Moynihan?

I can't stand the neoconservative movement and disagree with it on pretty much all levels but you have a very mainstream view of them, which is to say that what you know about them was spoon fed to you by another ignorant partisan source.

[houndawg]

That's all I need to know, and all I really care about. The "isolationism" crap is just more political fodder (like making abortion illegal) that ain't gonna happen but is used to rally the base of the opponent.

True words...
But is Randy Paul a Libertarian version of Obama..?
A guy who will say anything to get elected - fool his core - and sway just enough of the middle to win
and then hit the switch and be a regular old POLITICIAN / Same old / Same old

I wonder..?

I don't. I think he'd crawl over his dying mother to fvck his dead sister.

[CID1990]

True words...
But is Randy Paul a Libertarian version of Obama..?
A guy who will say anything to get elected - fool his core - and sway just enough of the middle to win
and then hit the switch and be a regular old POLITICIAN / Same old / Same old

I wonder..?

I don't. I think he'd crawl over his dying mother to fvck his dead sister.

And in a perfect libertarian world he should be free to do that.

[OL FU]

Accuracy. And it's about half of the Republican Party.

FU is half correct.

Klam as usual is off the reservation. Source that half the Republican Party are scions of Leo Strauss and Daniel Patrick Moynihan?

I can't stand the neoconservative movement and disagree with it on pretty much all levels but you have a very mainstream view of them, which is to say that what you know about them was spoon fed to you by another ignorant partisan source.

Which half

[89Hen]

A guy who will say anything to get elected...

[kalm]

Accuracy. And it's about half of the Republican Party.

FU is half correct.

Klam as usual is off the reservation. Source that half the Republican Party are scions of Leo Strauss and Daniel Patrick Moynihan?

I can't stand the neoconservative movement and disagree with it on pretty much all levels but you have a very mainstream view of them, which is to say that what you know about them was spoon fed to you by another ignorant partisan source.

I'm sorry…

Are

Dick Cheney
Paul Wolfowitz
Don Rumsfeld
Richard Pearle
George W. Bush
Condoleeza Rice
Scooter Libby
John McCain
Lindsey Graham

Aware of this?

I know you're out of country and all, but half the Republicans is being generous.

Good to know you hate neo-cons though.

[Chizzang]

Dick Cheney
Paul Wolfowitz
Don Rumsfeld
Richard Pearle
George W. Bush
Condoleeza Rice
Scooter Libby
John McCain
Lindsey Graham

Kalm... Rush already said none of them are true Republicans
I'm just saving CID the time required to post that (minus the Rush certificate of approval)

[CID1990]

FU is half correct.

Klam as usual is off the reservation. Source that half the Republican Party are scions of Leo Strauss and Daniel Patrick Moynihan?

I can't stand the neoconservative movement and disagree with it on pretty much all levels but you have a very mainstream view of them, which is to say that what you know about them was spoon fed to you by another ignorant partisan source.

I'm sorry…

Are

Dick Cheney
Paul Wolfowitz
Don Rumsfeld
Richard Pearle
George W. Bush
Condoleeza Rice
Scooter Libby
John McCain
Lindsey Graham

Aware of this?

I know you're out of country and all, but half the Republicans is being generous.

Good to know you hate neo-cons though.

almost half of those are not neoconservatives at all

Wolfowitz is the only full blown dyed in the wool neocon on your little list, and there are a few wannabes there

go do a little due diligence before posting that nonsense

[CID1990]

Dick Cheney
Paul Wolfowitz
Don Rumsfeld
Richard Pearle
George W. Bush
Condoleeza Rice
Scooter Libby
John McCain
Lindsey Graham

Kalm... Rush already said none of them are true Republicans
I'm just saving CID the time required to post that (minus the Rush certificate of approval)

what is it national miss the fvcking point day?

chizzy still in a tizzy

[CID1990]

FU is half correct.

Klam as usual is off the reservation. Source that half the Republican Party are scions of Leo Strauss and Daniel Patrick Moynihan?

I can't stand the neoconservative movement and disagree with it on pretty much all levels but you have a very mainstream view of them, which is to say that what you know about them was spoon fed to you by another ignorant partisan source.

Which half

the "neoconservative =" half.

[kalm]

I'm sorry…

Are

Dick Cheney
Paul Wolfowitz
Don Rumsfeld
Richard Pearle
George W. Bush
Condoleeza Rice
Scooter Libby
John McCain
Lindsey Graham

Aware of this?

I know you're out of country and all, but half the Republicans is being generous.

Good to know you hate neo-cons though.

almost half of those are not neoconservatives at all

Wolfowitz is the only full blown dyed in the wool neocon on your little list, and there are a few wannabes there

go do a little due diligence before posting that nonsense

Yes, I remember your earlier claims about this and neoconservatism's ties to the left. Instead of being coy, why don't you produce a definition of neoconservatism so we are on the same page. And remember, the term really wasn't used much until the 2,000's so a relevant, modern, definition would be handy.

Also...I forgot to list your boy, John Bolton.

[OL FU]

Which half

the "neoconservative =" half.

Oh I though it was the "FU" instead of the "OL"

[CID1990]

almost half of those are not neoconservatives at all

Wolfowitz is the only full blown dyed in the wool neocon on your little list, and there are a few wannabes there

go do a little due diligence before posting that nonsense

Yes, I remember your earlier claims about this and neoconservatism's ties to the left. Instead of being coy, why don't you produce a definition of neoconservatism so we are on the same page. And remember, the term really wasn't used much until the 2,000's so a relevant, modern, definition would be handy.

Also...I forgot to list your boy, John Bolton.

Klam calling someone else coy

You are the one who is putting out the lazy liberal pop version of what a neocon is without anything to back it up. You started the thread with a fail, so I suggest that YOU go look it up. There are many different definitions out there but the common thread between all of them has to do with origin and foreign policy (liberal interventionist).

I dont know where you got John Bolton as "my boy" from, either. I'll just chalk that up as you just grasping.

Since YOU started this goofy thread with a shaky premise maybe YOU should put up a definition of neoconservatism as YOU see it.

it should be entertaining