Page 10 of 10 FirstFirst ... 8910
Results 91 to 97 of 97

Thread: Ron Paul: ‘Neocon influence’ is infiltrating tea parties

  1. #91
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    02-13-10 @ 10:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    141

    Re: Ron Paul: ‘Neocon influence’ is infiltrating tea parties

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    On a side-note. I find it amusing I get the most thanks by defending Ron Paul, conservatives, and liberals, but no cheers for explaining what neoconservatism is.
    Neo-con and neo-conservatism were hijacked terms used as an anti-Semitic straw-man attack by the very anti-Semitic Radical Left, Muslims, and Ron Paul kooks who are all very self-hating blame America first loons to insinuate that the Joos had hijacked America's foreign policy for the good of Israel and also to leverage the ignorance's of the masses in order to vilify and demonize the Bush administration, and to their credit it worked very well.

    It was just another play on the same old Protocols of the Elders of Zion theme whereby the Joos somehow behind the scenes control the world, the money, and the news media. Yet, that sort of paranoia when combine with ignorance is very powerful propaganda.

    Nevertheless, Bush was not a neo-con. He was a stealth big government progressive that masqueraded as being a conservative and who also surrounded himself with other big government progressives, and like all progressives they were also blinded by political correct multiculturalism, which also explains why both wars went off the tracks so badly.

    Not to mention, for those loons that still believe that America's foreign policy was somehow hijacked by mysterious neo-con joos, Israel is by far worse off today than it was at the beginning of the Bush administration thanks in large part to Bush's political correctness and incompetent foreign policy.

  2. #92
    Angry Former GOP Voter
    Fiddytree's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:39 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    25,689

    Re: Ron Paul: ‘Neocon influence’ is infiltrating tea parties

    Quote Originally Posted by danarhea View Post
    Defining Neoconservatism is easy. William Kristol already did. Just use his own words....



    -William Kristol
    Again, that was Irving Kristol, and that became an insider's joke, not really a definition. It was a sort of back and forth intellectual's banter (I think it was between two journals) between two men, with the other man escaping my memory. At the end of the day it ended like this: A neoconservative is a liberal who has been mugged by reality. A neoliberal is a liberal who got mugged by reality but has not pressed charges.

    That "definition" was problematic for many reasons to begin with, and then it became more complicated once the so-called neoconservatives had never gone through a supposed johnny-come-lately identity crisis and had been more or less identified with the conservative movement and the Republican Party their whole lives.
    Last edited by Fiddytree; 02-13-10 at 02:29 PM.
    Michael J Petrilli-"Is School Choice Enough?"-A response to the recent timidity of American conservatives toward education reform. https://nationalaffairs.com/publicat...-choice-enough

  3. #93
    Angry Former GOP Voter
    Fiddytree's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:39 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    25,689

    Re: Ron Paul: ‘Neocon influence’ is infiltrating tea parties

    Quote Originally Posted by Karl Rove View Post
    Neo-con and neo-conservatism were hijacked terms used as an anti-Semitic straw-man attack by the very anti-Semitic Radical Left, Muslims, and Ron Paul kooks who are all very self-hating blame America first loons to insinuate that the Joos had hijacked America's foreign policy for the good of Israel and also to leverage the ignorance's of the masses in order to vilify and demonize the Bush administration, and to their credit it worked very well.

    It was just another play on the same old Protocols of the Elders of Zion theme whereby the Joos somehow behind the scenes control the world, the money, and the news media. Yet, that sort of paranoia when combine with ignorance is very powerful propaganda.

    Nevertheless, Bush was not a neo-con. He was a stealth big government progressive that masqueraded as being a conservative and who also surrounded himself with other big government progressives, and like all progressives they were also blinded by political correct multiculturalism, which also explains why both wars went off the tracks so badly.

    Not to mention, for those loons that still believe that America's foreign policy was somehow hijacked by mysterious neo-con joos, Israel is by far worse off today than it was at the beginning of the Bush administration thanks in large part to Bush's political correctness and incompetent foreign policy.
    These things are hard to do, "Rove". Not all Neoconservatives care about the same issues, and if they do, this is not too much to allow us to declare that they universally like or dislike a policy or philosophy. Yes, a great deal of the time there is hints of anti-semitism, or an accusation that is at times used by neoconservatives too liberally. If we were two use Neoconservatism as foreign policy neoconservatism, then Bush fits one portion of the definition, while having a strange transformation that parallels the joke I mentioned above, due to the fact he was not an initial believer in it, but then later had a "mugged by reality moment".

    Now, are Neoconservatives largely okay with big government? Yes and no. Historically, there was a tendency to be skeptical of government's ability to improve things through ambitious legislation or government programs. It doesn't mean that they were all automatically against that, or could be unified in which programs were okay to support and which ones were not.

    Yes, multiculturalism is largely something Neoconservatives have had a hard time coming to terms with. Now, but I remind you, Nathan Glazer (that handsome looking old devil as my avatar) came to terms with multiculturalism in the 1990s. Now, does multiculturalism really come into play with the foreign policy aspect? Not so much. Most foreign policy Neoconservatives who spoke out against the implementation of the so-called Neoconservative foreign policy did so out of awareness that the President and has administration were not putting out the desired amount of troops on the ground, or other matters troubled them greatly. Other neoconservatives can completely speak out against the war, that's no terrible issue, because it happened with Vietnam while at the same time maintaining their label.
    Michael J Petrilli-"Is School Choice Enough?"-A response to the recent timidity of American conservatives toward education reform. https://nationalaffairs.com/publicat...-choice-enough

  4. #94
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Chicago
    Last Seen
    04-02-15 @ 06:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    8,211

    Re: Ron Paul: ‘Neocon influence’ is infiltrating tea parties

    Quote Originally Posted by Karl Rove View Post
    Blow back is an exceedingly absurd theory under any circumstances and especially with respect to Islam, since, per their mandate, the Dar al Islam has been waging jihad with the non-Islamic world in one way or another continuously for the past almost 1400 years. Indeed, when Jefferson dispatched the Marines, it was to combat the same ongoing perpetual global jihad that is still very much alive today, thanks to the massive transfer of wealth from the West to the Dar al Islam because of oil.

    As a matter of fact, even when the Dar al Islam was at its weakest point ever during the early part of the 20th century after being carved up and divided into many different countries with many different leaders, the Dar al Islam maintained jihads with Israel, India, and many other non-Muslim countries as well, as conquering the world via the imposition of Sharia is the overriding highest mandate of Islam and, indeed, its sole purpose.

    Thus, applying the silly idiotic theory of blow black with respect to the Dar al Islam's perpetual global jihad is as about incompetent as it gets, considering the documented historical record of the Dar al Islam's perpetual global jihad, which is almost 1400 years old.

    Hence, it couldn't be more obvious that like you, that self-hating blame America first kook Ron Paul is totally ignorant of history and the perpetual global jihad. Which makes him totally unqualified to be anything other than a dog catcher. Why don't you go theorize with Ron Paul about how our government is responsible for 9/11?

    Nevertheless, though it is indeed part of the historical record and a documented fact that Ron Paul blamed 9/11on the CIA's ouster of Mossadegh, when Mossadegh was a non-Muslim kafir infidel and not a Muslim, and had he been alive in 1979, he would have been one of the first non-Muslim kafir infidels the Khomeini regime would have executed.

    Not to mention also that the ruling Mullahs are Shi'a and OBL and AQ are Sunnis and mortal enemies. Indeed, you self-hating Ron Paul groupies are totally oblivious. No wonder you buy into self-loathing theories like blow back!
    I don't buy into Ron Paul's theory of blow-back. I think he overstates its effect on the Jihadists' motivations, but I don't think it can be entirely discounted either.

    Dude, Ron Paul held his nose and voted for the invasion of Afghanistan because of the pressure he felt of being the sole Republican not to vote for it, but he soon began publicly blaming 9/11 on the ouster of Mossadegh, at the same time that he also began pandering to the Truthers and other assorted kooks who believe that our government is responsible for 9/11.
    You can speculate all you want about his motivations. Fact is, he voted to invade Afghanistan, and even submitted legislation to grant letters of marque and reprisal...

    Search Results - THOMAS (Library of Congress)

    He obviously understood the threat posed by AQ, and wanted to neutralize that threat in a manner consistent with the Constitution.

    It couldn't be any more obvious that he had to hold his nose to vote for the invasion, which is the reason why only kooks support Ron Paul. I mean...Ron Paul couldn't be any more oblivious with respect to the threat emanating from the Dar al Islam, yet he talks and writes with complete certainty when it comes to blaming America first. The guy and his groupies are all narrow-minded self-hating blame America first kooks, as for as I'm concerned.
    Yea, you're right. American interventionism has absolutely no negative effects on anything. Everything foreign policy decision we make exists in a total vacuum.

    America!!! **** yeah!!!

    Give me a break...go back and read your own posts. You have been apologizing for that loser for more than a few pages in this thread now and the only misconceptions and inaccuracies contained in this thread are the ones you supplied.
    No. I've been trying to educate you on the actual definition of Jeffersonian and Washingtonian non-interventionism. Since you seem to think Jefferson's war with th Barbary pirates was inconsistent with non-interventionism, it's obvious that you have no idea what non-interventionism actually is, and prefer to think of it in overly simplistic terms that do no fully encompass its nuances and complexities.

    I'm ranting and raving because I can't stand that self-hating blame America first kook and his unhinged followers. Indeed, they and what they proliferate are a danger to America, and I'm also pissed off because they try to claim the mantle of conservatism for themselves, when they are really a group of loons and assorted kooks. Not only that, but the left uses those kooks, loons, and weirdos to demonize and vilify all conservatives as being unhinged, when the reality is they believe the same exact idiotic nonsense that Paul proliferates and Paul and his unhinged acolytes are a fringe group of weirdos.
    Right...kooks, unhinged, weirdos, etc...

  5. #95
    John Schnatter 2012 Phantom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Last Seen
    03-20-12 @ 12:48 AM
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    638

    Re: Ron Paul: ‘Neocon influence’ is infiltrating tea parties

    Quote Originally Posted by Navy Pride View Post
    This thread is crap.......There are many differences between Paul and the Tea Party movement
    Ron Paul started the tea-parties!!!!

    ............Especially social ones.......
    Are the tea-party people on "your side" pro-freedom or anti-freedom?

    A good Tea Party member would never appear on a fruit cakes program like Rachel Maddow like Paul did.....Paul is desperate for publicity.......
    Ron Paul isn't the type of person who runs and hides from interviews. He has been on Glenn Beck, Bill Maher, Bill O' Reilly, Freedom Watch, Fox and Friends, various shows on Russia Today and MSNBC as well as CNN.

  6. #96
    Advisor Plato's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Here be Dragons
    Last Seen
    09-01-17 @ 02:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    317

    Re: Ron Paul: ‘Neocon influence’ is infiltrating tea parties

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    On a side-note. I find it amusing I get the most thanks by defending Ron Paul, conservatives, and liberals, but no cheers for explaining what neoconservatism is.
    To get respect here, one must pucker up and ready to kiss some hairy man ass!
    It's not easy being green!
    I thanked you. Still, since then it's been fun watching the conservatives tear into each other. Whilst those on the left know we are riven asunder with schism (despite some of our opponents whose limited intellects cannot compute further than "you're all commies"), conservatives too often live with the illusion that everyone's a conservative and they all agree with them.

    I mean we've got Holocaust deniers like Pat Buchanan, internationalist interventionists like Ronald Reagan, political opportunists like George W Bush, career blue bloods like GHW Bush, thugs like John Boulton, French speaking intellectuals like Richard Perle, "maverick" lightweights like John McCain, American Power exceptionalists like Cheney and Rumsfeld, moderates like Colin Powell, big government moralizers like Irving Kristol, international civil servants like Paul Wolwowitz, paleoconservatives with decency like Mike Huckabee and populist rabble rousers like Sarah Palin. But what about the Tea Party goers? To me it would seem like they would choose "none of the above" if given the choice.

    The Tea Party, at least by reputation, is an isolationist, nationalist, protectionist movement that is anti government and was not roused to anger until a black liberal President was elected to the White House. Despite this they are sworn enemies of the Bush administration's fiscal policy, particularly the rescuing of the global economy. In the Tea Party world...small and very small town American, hostile to big corporations, international trade ... the global economy can very well go and collapse rather than put US debt up to 10% of GDP. Economics is of no concern to them, either because it makes their brains hurt or because they cannot see the conncection between the collapse of global finance and international supply chains and their small town, small business suburban lives. On the edges of this are the anti secularist Tory activists who have always been there, trashing Enlightenment values and urging theocracy on the American way of life. This is a movement that openly trashes America's twentieth century global hero Roosevelt at their Nashville conference and that has to bribe its keynote speaker to talk for them, even as they deny that she is their leader.

    How Ron Paul can say that there is something "neoconservative" about this movement is beyond me. He is usually a clever commentator. How does Irvine Kristol's tolerance of deficits and preference for social engineering (albeit for conservative ends) come into the Tea Party? This is largely a rabble of anti intellectual grunts who's political philosophy rarely goes beyond "the President is a commie". Hardly a match for the party of Leo Strauss, and the philosophy of the Cave. I'm not sure how the "noble lie" goes down at the screamfests, unless its the confusion of a movement that sought representation in 1773 with one that rails against elected representatives in 2010. Do they discuss Plato at the Tea Parties? Is the exploration of the Theory of Forms de rigeur in Tea Party circles?

    Quite clearly the conservatives who get into power...the ones who know how the world works under capitalism, what you need to do to sustain that, and that the big bad world out there is actually something important that will not go away because you wish it to...are quiet now. Yet again they let the thugs, ignoramuses and zealots do their oppositioning for them. And the most elitist of these eltists are the neocons. They are the quietest of all. Can you really see the worldly Paul Wolwowitz at a Tea Party rally? But if these elitists are calculating that when push comes to shove they can step in, take over and restore conservativism to the clever people, like they have always done before, they may have miscalculated. This Tea Party has all the populism and zeal of a Peronist movement. It is a well organized and well funded counter revolutionary Tory movement. Of course the American people may flirt with folksy isolationism, but they know that only when America leads can it truly flourish. That is the result of every election. Those who are perceived to be international leaders will prevail. The "head for the hills, baton down the hatches, let the sky fall in rather than bail out the banks" numskulls are not this. They are though a guarantor of a second term for President Obama.
    Last edited by Plato; 02-14-10 at 07:49 AM.
    There is a way to gain the whole world. It is to gain the people, and having gained them, one gains the whole world. There is a way to gain the people. Gain their hearts and minds and then you gain them. Mencius

  7. #97
    ANTI**ANTIFA
    ReverendHellh0und's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Temple of Solomon
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:01 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    75,522

    Re: Ron Paul: ‘Neocon influence’ is infiltrating tea parties

    Quote Originally Posted by Plato View Post

    I mean we've got Holocaust deniers like Pat Buchanan,.



    ..........
    Let evil swiftly befall those who have wrongly condemned us

Page 10 of 10 FirstFirst ... 8910

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •