• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

Are you a Neocon?

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
66,712
3,517
126
Some of their principles to help you decide:

1 They agree with Trotsky on permanent revolution, violent as well as intellectual.

2 They are for redrawing the map of the Middle East and are willing to use force to do so.

3 They believe in preemptive war to achieve desired ends.

4 They accept the notion that the ends justify the means?that hardball politics is a moral necessity.

5 They express no opposition to the welfare state.

6 They are not bashful about an American empire; instead they strongly endorse it.

7 They believe lying is necessary for the state to survive.

8 They believe a powerful federal government is a benefit.

9 They believe pertinent facts about how a society should be run should be held by the elite and withheld from those who do not have the courage to deal with it.

10 They believe neutrality in foreign affairs is ill advised.

11 They hold Leo Strauss in high esteem.

12 They believe imperialism, if progressive in nature, is appropriate.

13 Using American might to force American ideals on others is acceptable. Force should not be limited to the defense of our country.

14 9-11 resulted from the lack of foreign entanglements, not from too many.

15 They dislike and despise libertarians (therefore, the same applies to all strict constitutionalists.)

16 They endorse attacks on civil liberties, such as those found in the Patriot Act, as being necessary.

17 They unconditionally support Israel and have a close alliance with the Likud Party.


From;

HON. RON PAUL OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES


Full ananlsis here
 

BarneyFife

Diamond Member
Aug 12, 2001
3,878
0
76
Here is one thing I notice about Neo-cons, they are all about money.

Old school conservatives from back in the day were all about the US. They only drove domestic vehicles, they were against buying anything that wasn't from the US, they called corporations who would jump ship and move their plants to China, traitors. I know first hand living in Michigan.

The so called "new" conservatives support Israel to death, would die for Israel even though their Catholic, justify welfare to Israel, try to squeeze out as much money as possible from anyone and everyone, moving business overseas because it's cheaper. It's not about America and Americans, it's about how much money they are going to make. Selfish bloodsucking money whores. This is the 2003 conservative. All the good conservatives are either dead or old now.
 

spaceman

Lifer
Dec 4, 2000
17,468
73
91
i agree with roughly 50% of those statements.
so i guess i do not meet the criteria :p
im a half-con.
 

Dari

Lifer
Oct 25, 2002
17,136
37
91
one thing I would endorse would be what I call progressive laws. These are basically laws that would adapt to each situation. The reason for this is that the founding fathers would never have imagined what new issues would have surfaced since their passings. Progressive laws are not only modular, but surgical. They hold every situation in a certain state and examine it to see if it fits the mold of current acts. If it does, then a strict reading of the law is required. If not, then the law is adapted for that situation. In general, progressive laws are vague but poignant. This would keep society from being over-regulated and progressive.
 

Dari

Lifer
Oct 25, 2002
17,136
37
91
Originally posted by: Nitemare
I'm anti big government, this is one of my knocks against Bush
that's true. but the world is getting smaller and bigger, at the same time. In other word, the world is consolidating. You can see this in NAFTA, the European Union, ASEAN, and other multi-national and supranational organizations. My hope is that a more efficient gov't will emerge.

BarneyFife, have you read the paper Securing the realm? It stresses the need to end american aid to israel. BTW the paper was co-written by Benjamin Netanyahu, a former prime minister of israel.
 

BaliBabyDoc

Lifer
Jan 20, 2001
10,737
0
0
that's true. but the world is getting smaller and bigger, at the same time. In other word, the world is consolidating. You can see this in NAFTA, the European Union, ASEAN, and other multi-national and supranational organizations. My hope is that a more efficient gov't will emerge.
Can I take this to mean (according to you) more efficient government will evolve as it becomes further removed from the people?
 

LilBlinbBlahIce

Golden Member
Dec 31, 2001
1,837
0
0
Originally posted by: BarneyFife
Here is one thing I notice about Neo-cons, they are all about money.

Old school conservatives from back in the day were all about the US. They only drove domestic vehicles, they were against buying anything that wasn't from the US, they called corporations who would jump ship and move their plants to China, traitors. I know first hand living in Michigan.

The so called "new" conservatives support Israel to death, would die for Israel even though their Catholic, justify welfare to Israel, try to squeeze out as much money as possible from anyone and everyone, moving business overseas because it's cheaper. It's not about America and Americans, it's about how much money they are going to make. Selfish bloodsucking money whores. This is the 2003 conservative. All the good conservatives are either dead or old now.
I think you mean Evangelical Protestants, not Catholics. the rest is pretty much right.
 

Dari

Lifer
Oct 25, 2002
17,136
37
91
Originally posted by: BaliBabyDoc
that's true. but the world is getting smaller and bigger, at the same time. In other word, the world is consolidating. You can see this in NAFTA, the European Union, ASEAN, and other multi-national and supranational organizations. My hope is that a more efficient gov't will emerge.
Can I take this to mean (according to you) more efficient government will evolve as it becomes further removed from the people?
nice try but putting words into my mouth won't work. I doubt that we can ever go back to the days of small gov't. My hope is that we eventually get a more efficient gov't. That is a pipe dream and I know it. The fact that the Feds don't have to balance the budget is a huge factor inhibiting a smaller and more efficient gov't.
 

Zebo

Elite Member
Jul 29, 2001
39,408
2
0
Nope....... and this is why I laugh at those who think theres a difference between Bush and Clinton. We have been headed slowly for 25 years into this overbearing monstrosity police state grown massively in size, spending and regulations. Does'nt matter who was president the trend has continued.
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
66,712
3,517
126
1 They agree with Trotsky on permanent revolution, violent as well as intellectual.

Dari's notion of progressive law.

2 They are for redrawing the map of the Middle East and are willing to use force to do so.

They are agents of Israel

3 They believe in preemptive war to achieve desired ends.

They are highly motivated by fear like the holocaust.

4 They accept the notion that the ends justify the means?that hardball politics is a moral necessity.

Better to kill than be afraid. Refusal to see their illness is within.

5 They express no opposition to the welfare state.

Probably because people are worthless anyway, let them eat cake.

6 They are not bashful about an American empire; instead they strongly endorse it.

Paranoid need for control so that their inner fear's aren't triggered by external events.

7 They believe lying is necessary for the state to survive.

Paranoid need for control at any cost. Total destruction of inner character from fear.

8 They believe a powerful federal government is a benefit.

Paranoid need for absolute control so that, again, external factors don't arise that can evoke fear.

9 They believe pertinent facts about how a society should be run should be held by the elite and withheld from those who do not have the courage to deal with it.

The pool of paranoid delusionals is not huge.

10 They believe neutrality in foreign affairs is ill advised.

Events could take a scary turn.

11 They hold Leo Strauss in high esteem.

Adulation of a worst case extreme paranoid.

12 They believe imperialism, if progressive in nature, is appropriate.

Progressive here means controlled by them.

13 Using American might to force American ideals on others is acceptable. Force should not be limited to the defense of our country.

Not American ideals, but their interpretation of them. The paranoid delusional exhibits the disease of certainty, the absolute confidence that only he can see the way. This leads to the notion of progressive law, the rationalized navigation of their inner hell projected outwardly as the worlds mine field. Kill anything that scares me, to put it simply.

14 9-11 resulted from the lack of foreign entanglements, not from too many.

Fear must be actively managed. The control freak aspect of fear.

15 They dislike and despise libertarians (therefore, the same applies to all strict constitutionalists.)

The absolute rejection of the constraints of Divine Law. The Neocon's greatest enemy is absolute truth, because his greatest need is to reject the realization of his sin in playing God. The control freaks fear of surrender and ego death, the only thing that can cure him. He had deified psychopathology. He is our sickest of the sick.

16 They endorse attacks on civil liberties, such as those found in the Patriot Act, as being necessary.

All part of the paranoid delusion that threat is everywhere. The neocon is hopelessly lost because he sees his fear everywhere but cannot look in the direction from whence it comes. For the neocon, health looks sick. He has to ego-die before he can get well.

17 They unconditionally support Israel and have a close alliance with the Likud Party.

Perhaps they should be tried for treason as agents of a foreign state. At the minimum they must be removed. They are attempting to destroy everything the founding fathers understood as good.
 

Dari

Lifer
Oct 25, 2002
17,136
37
91
Moonbeam, the only one paranoid here is you. your interpretition of Ron Paul's interpretition of what a neo-con is misleading at best and conspirational at worst. Try a better analysis not based on your own prejudices and your blanket adulation of fear.
 

Zebo

Elite Member
Jul 29, 2001
39,408
2
0
Deficits are exploding and the national debt is now rising at greater than a half-trillion dollars per year. Taxes do not go down?even if we vote to lower them. They can?t, as long as spending is increased, since all spending must be paid for one way or another. Both Presidents Reagan and the elder George Bush raised taxes directly. With this administration, so far, direct taxes have been reduced?and they certainly should have been?but it means little if spending increases and deficits rise.

When taxes are not raised to accommodate higher spending, the bills must be paid by either borrowing or ?printing? new money. This is one reason why we conveniently have a generous Federal Reserve chairman who is willing to accommodate the Congress. With borrowing and inflating, the ?tax? is delayed and distributed in a way that makes it difficult for those paying the tax to identify it. Like future generations and those on fixed incomes who suffer from rising prices, and those who lose jobs they certainly feel the consequences of economic dislocation that this process causes. Government spending is always a ?tax? burden on the American people and is never equally or fairly distributed. The poor and low-middle income workers always suffer the most from the deceitful tax of inflation and borrowing.
This is also why Bushs tax cut was in reality a tax increase when coupled with infaltion and the increased debt he's running. Unless you die really soon your taxes will be raised again to pay for what Bush already spent and your dollar is worth less too. Fools. Pay me now or pay me later but you will pay.
 

Dari

Lifer
Oct 25, 2002
17,136
37
91
Originally posted by: Zebo
Deficits are exploding and the national debt is now rising at greater than a half-trillion dollars per year. Taxes do not go down?even if we vote to lower them. They can?t, as long as spending is increased, since all spending must be paid for one way or another. Both Presidents Reagan and the elder George Bush raised taxes directly. With this administration, so far, direct taxes have been reduced?and they certainly should have been?but it means little if spending increases and deficits rise.

When taxes are not raised to accommodate higher spending, the bills must be paid by either borrowing or ?printing? new money. This is one reason why we conveniently have a generous Federal Reserve chairman who is willing to accommodate the Congress. With borrowing and inflating, the ?tax? is delayed and distributed in a way that makes it difficult for those paying the tax to identify it. Like future generations and those on fixed incomes who suffer from rising prices, and those who lose jobs they certainly feel the consequences of economic dislocation that this process causes. Government spending is always a ?tax? burden on the American people and is never equally or fairly distributed. The poor and low-middle income workers always suffer the most from the deceitful tax of inflation and borrowing.
This is also why Bushs tax cut was in reality a tax increase when coupled with infaltion and the increased debt he's running. Unless you die really soon your taxes will be raised again to pay for what Bush already spent and your dollar is worth less too. Fools. Pay me now or pay me later but you will pay.
inflation? what inflation? this debt will be paid with higher taxes, when the economy turns around. That's how its always been: Lower taxes during economic downturn and higher taxes during economic upturns. This is Fiscal Economics 101.
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
66,712
3,517
126
"....... and your blanket adulation of fear."
-------------------------
Is that what happened, Dari, somebody took away your suck suck blankie? It could easily be just as simple as that. Your worst nightmare, known and re-experienced, is almost nothing at all.
 

Zebo

Elite Member
Jul 29, 2001
39,408
2
0
I need an econmonics lesson from you like I need a whole in my head.. Tell me Dari whens the last time Debt got paid off during that mystical "economic upturn"? In the last 25 yesrs it's grown from 1 trillion to almost 6 trillion. Still waiting.

Inflation... Read the quoted post before you reply. He explains it perfectly. What happens when you print new (meaning more than in circulation than before you printed it) money and distrubute it thoughout the economy visa vi the government?
 
Dec 27, 2001
11,272
0
0
Originally posted by: LilBlinbBlahIce
Bravo Moonie. :beer:
That's what I said. That was one clever post. Phew. Creating a fake list of traits attributed to far extremes of extreme minorities and assign it to your opposition. That requires cheerworthy intellect indeed. Bravo.
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
66,712
3,517
126
Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor
Originally posted by: LilBlinbBlahIce
Bravo Moonie. :beer:
That's what I said. That was one clever post. Phew. Creating a fake list of traits attributed to far extremes of extreme minorities and assign it to your opposition. That requires cheerworthy intellect indeed. Bravo.
What you said so far is:

"This is what you're resorting to now? :shakehead" and " Looks like you already got one." neither of which look like "Bravo Moonie :beer:" as you claim.

Further, saying I created that list and implying a lack of intellect therein is a rather phony thing to say. You didn?t understand that the list was a quote? If not you're probably rather dull, or one of the ready fire aim crowd. Try at least not to make your insults sound stupid. I don't need that kind of flattery.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY