Neo-Cons Appear To Still Control Republican Candidates

Discussion in 'Politics' started by AAAintheBeltway, Dec 9, 2011.

  1. Of course I know this, why else do you think I have so much contempt for all of this two party nonsense.

    However, I'm not sure I understand why you, of all people, are trying to make this point. You've spent the better part of the past year, along with AK47, defending Obama at every turn. I realize you are quite sensitive to all issues of race, and I've largely attributed your defensiveness to this core issue.
     
    #41     Dec 12, 2011
  2. Plainly, neocons are, as a general rule, racist, sexist, homophobic, and engage in ridiculous amounts of religiosity.

    I bait them, they charge out, and it puts in bas relief who neocons really and truly are at the rank and file level.

    Of course I am sensitive to race when some neocons espouse ideas of African Americans being inferior, and trying to turn the clock back to 1950. Some of then are hiding behing RON PAUL, to make matters worse.

    The KKK is wearing three piece suits nowadays, they are very nuanced and will never outright call someone black the n-word. Instead, they will post videos about "concerns" and those concerns will have an underlying thread in them, as if we are stupid.

    The latest, Ray Lewis gets a pass about talking about God when Tim Tebow does not. Hmmmm. See supposed independent Kotex about that one.
     
    #42     Dec 12, 2011
  3. Maverick74

    Maverick74

    The neo-cons are secular jews you half wit. Atheists. Yes, I understand neo-con party grew into something larger then that group after 9/11 but the core fundamental ideas do not come from racists or homophobes. The neo-con movement is not the least bit cultural. I don't know why you don't understand that. Try picking up a copy of "Commentary" magazine sometime and you'll get a better understanding of what neo-cons are not.

    You are throwing all these different groups into the same basket and the fact is, they have very little in common except for their dislike of Obama.
     
    #43     Dec 12, 2011
  4. Max E.

    Max E.

    Congratulations this may be the dumbest fucking post i have ever read on elite trader. On a site full of misfits you are the Queen.

     
    #44     Dec 12, 2011
  5. Not my fault you lack the comprehension to get it Drama Queen. But now you have some drama for the day, and you must feel grrreat!

    Carry on:)
     
    #45     Dec 12, 2011
  6. +10
     
    #46     Dec 12, 2011
  7. Mav has this neo-con thing nailed, and you guys should pay more attention to what he says about it. The original neo-cons like Irving Kristol ( father of Weekly Standard publisher Bill) were liberal jews who broke with the democrats over the latter's appeasement of the Soviet Union, particularly concering the Soviets' treatment of Jewish dissidents.

    Through people like Henry Kissinger, they became highly influential in the Republican party. It was a symbiotic partnership. The republicans suddenly had major league intellectuals on their team, all energetically writing op-eds about how misguided and weak the democrats were. As for the neo-cons, they got a veto power over republican policy in foreign affairs, most notably on Israel and the USSR.

    With the demise of the Soviet Union, for which the neo-cons could claim a considerable amount of credit, the focus shifted to the middle east and the threat of militant islam. Here their arguments took on more subtlety, since making Israel the 51st state was not hugely popular outside Washington, DC. The argument became that democracies do not start wars and are generally a lot friendlier than dictatorships. It was an appealing argument from the western perspective, since we saw western europe and the US as non-aggressors versus scary dictators who started wars like Stalin, Imperial Japan and Hitler. Of course, lost in the moral preening was the total absence of any real evidence to support the theory. Hitler had been popularly elected, and Stalin was our main ally in WW II. According to revisionist history, Japan was desperate not to get into war with us but popularly elected FDR forced them into an untenable situation.

    George Bush swallowed the democracy=peace line hook, line and sinker. Unfortunately, no one pointed out that we don't control whom foreign voters select. In the case of one middle eastern country after another, they opted for the guy the immams told them to vote for, normally a repressive islamist zealot. We are seeing it now in two countries Obama pushed into democracy, Egypt and Lybia. Even Iraq and Afghanistan, which we have wasted trillions liberating, have two nominally secular leaders who are anti-american and in the case of Iraq, in bed with our biggest enemy Iran.

    One would have thought the failures of Bush's policies would have discredited the neo-cons permanently, but apparently not. Their latest excuse is that Iraq was a big success until obama mishandled it. Maybe he got a few things wrong, but this is like carping about a coffee stain on the seat of a car that was just totalled in an accident.

    There is a basic divide here, and it is not whether we want to engage in the world or be isolationists. It is whether we are the world's policeman, sending out troops to fight and die and make enemies of people in lands where we have no vital interests. It is whether our guiding principle is minding our own business unless out vital interests are threatened or forcing our will on weaker countries through force.

    Unfortunately, this is an argument we should have 15 years ago. As Ron Paul pointed out, it is becoming academic because we have wasted so much of our wealth on these endless wars that we just cannot afford to continue doing it.
     
    #47     Dec 12, 2011
  8. pspr

    pspr

    It's always the racist whitey with RCG. I suppose his perception is reinforced when he goes to work and sees that whites occupy most of the doctor positions and sit on the medical boards. It must make RCG furious every day that he goes to work and sees himself as a lowly bed pan changer.
     
    #48     Dec 12, 2011
  9. I know..It was so disjointed and without logic that I got a headache at the thought of posting a reply.

    RCG sees racism, anti-semitism and sexism everywhere. Nevermind the fact that it has little to do with the Neo-con movement.
     
    #49     Dec 12, 2011
  10. Lucrum

    Lucrum

    Ditto all
     
    #50     Dec 12, 2011