What a surprise to see most of the comments come from died-in-the-wool socialists...considering it's about conservatives I wonder if they can know what they're talking about.
The problem with this piece is very simple. it's wrong. Dead wrong.
It uses the views of ONE self-described neo-con as the base of whether necons are really conservative?
I mean really, a base of one?
Since the phrase was coined in the late 70's, it has taken on confusing meanings, usually driven by people who are NOT neocon to the point it has become meaningless to me.....
When the Amerikcan left responds to my criticisms of Obama by accusing me of being a "Necon" in one sentence, and "Teabagger" in the next, then the word should lose all concept of even having a meaning.
When someone can document that Mr. Rubio speaks for a majority of "neocons" then I will give credence to what I see as another attempt to distort the term
"Small people talk about people, average people talk about events, great people talk about ideas" Eleanor Roosevelt
It dates back to socialists and their desire to spread democracy. However ironic that might be.
32 “Whoever acknowledges me before others, I will also acknowledge before my Father in heaven. 33 But whoever disowns me before others, I will disown before my Father in heaven.
You see, I understand what a neocon is, I have debated them going back to 2002, I know about Kristol and PNAC and their members, their ideology and their results. I can even link to a simple fairly well done summary of them with little effort. I don't have to play this game of "deny the opponent" you play....because it gets nowhere.
Again, lets see you offer anything beyond catch phrase......that is unless you want to play stupid again.