Definition of NEO-CON taken from N2NH's thread on Buckley.

[N5NPO]

Is this definition of NEO-CON approved by N2NH?

The neoconservatives, who drifted over from the radical left, brought their commitment to an expansive government intimately involved in shaping the social and economic life of the nation.

This exerpt was taken from a thread here on "The Political Junkie".

Is this what is means to be a NEO-CON as often gets thrown around as a label on so many of us who disagree with N2NH and others who post on the 'ZED?

Sounds like a NEO-CON is a radical leftist sent in to infiltrate and destroy "conservatism" by expanding government....

Comments anyone?

[W3MIV]

"The neoconservatives, who drifted over from the radical left, brought their commitment to an expansive government intimately involved in shaping the social and economic life of the nation."

This exerpt was taken from a thread here on "The Political Junkie".

Is this what i[t] means to be a NEO-CON...?

Your question belies a flawed understanding of the differences between "conservatives" and "neo-conservatives."

As a "conservative," Buckley disbelieved in the use of government to solve what were essentially societal problems. He disapproved of building up large bureaucracies to oversee and manage every aspect of people's lives and the economy. While he was not exactly "laissez-faire" in his economic beliefs, he was much closer to that philosophy of keeping hands off than he was to a use of government power to intervene to "level the playing field" -- which he saw as a market function, not as an opportunity for governmental intrusion. "Neo-conservatives" are as eager to swell government as are "liberal progressive interventionists" (the difference is soley one of their opposing goals) -- "conservatives" are eager to minimize government to the least realisitic level.

Buckley innately distrusted all systems, theories of government and formulae for achieving "equality," relying on a Catholic's understanding of the deeply flawed nature of man and on every-man's need to proactively choose to better his own life and the lives of those around him as a matter of personal, individual duty -- not as a matter of government fiat. Buckley knew only too well that, being a human enterprise, government always tends to become a coalition more of flaws than of virtues when it sets out to "improve" society. These deeply personal and individual beliefs are fundamental to a true "conservatism," and these are most notably absent in the governmental goals of modern "neo-conservatives" who approach government in much the same fashion as "liberal, progressive interventionists" -- only with opposing goals. Whereas both "liberal inteventionists" and "neo-conservatives" would apply governmental force to "correct" the sins of society, it is in the nature of those sins that the only differences are to be found: Both philosophies exist as opposing sides of the same coin of government power. Both are as actively interventionist in the private, personal lives of the citizenry, and both are as opposed to a strict "neutrality" with regard to legislating moral turpitude as an ordinary function of government.

It might be natural for you to make the intellectual leap to the conclusion that "conservatism" is equivalent to "libertarianism," but that is not specifically true: "Conservatives" recognize the necessity of using government to keep the nation safe and to minimally regulate the economy and the nation's business climate in ways that "libertarians" consider an excessive interference. True "libertarianism" equates to the creation of an aristocracy of economic oligarchs, a la the dogmatic fantasies of Ayn Rand. We have seen on this forum repeated assertions of the kinds of silliness that "libertarians" often assert as practicable policies.

To be a "conservative" is to make the honorable choice of seeking the least possible use of government and to give every individual the greatest possible choice of how to live a useful and happy life. It is a willingness to permit each person to seek his or her own level, and to suffer the consequences of poor choices, but only up to the point of damage to the commonweal.

To be a "neo-conservative" is to seek to use government power to instill a program as a substitute for those choices, no less than that effort to substitute a different program for choices by the "liberal progressive interventionists." Both mistrust the innate ability of a citizen to choose his or her own path through life. Both would obtrude to the extent "they can get away with." Both would amend the Constitution to achieve their differing goals if that course were practicable, and both have tried repeatedly.

[N3RQ]

In reality, neo-conservatism is little more than an outgrowth of the politics of the Henry M. "Scoop" Jackson wing of the Democratic Party, just as social conservatism is little more than an outgrowth of the politics of the former southern wing of the Democratic Party. Neither of these political ideologies are Republican in origin.

[AC0H]

Your question belies a flawed understanding of the differences between "conservatives" and "neo-conservatives."

As a "conservative," Buckley disbelieved in the use of government to solve what were essentially societal problems. He disapproved of building up large bureaucracies to oversee and manage every aspect of people's lives and the economy. While he was not exactly "laissez-faire" in his economic beliefs, he was much closer to that philosophy of keeping hands off than he was to a use of government power to intervene to "level the playing field" -- which he saw as a market function, not as an opportunity for governmental intrusion. "Neo-conservatives" are as eager to swell government as are "liberal progressive interventionists" (the difference is soley one of their opposing goals) -- "conservatives" are eager to minimize government to the least realisitic level.

Buckley innately distrusted all systems, theories of government and formulae for achieving "equality," relying on a Catholic's understanding of the deeply flawed nature of man and on every-man's need to proactively choose to better his own life and the lives of those around him as a matter of personal, individual duty -- not as a matter of government fiat. Buckley knew only too well that, being a human enterprise, government always tends to become a coalition more of flaws than of virtues when it sets out to "improve" society. These deeply personal and individual beliefs are fundamental to a true "conservatism," and these are most notably absent in the governmental goals of modern "neo-conservatives" who approach government in much the same fashion as "liberal, progressive interventionists" -- only with opposing goals. Whereas both "liberal inteventionists" and "neo-conservatives" would apply governmental force to "correct" the sins of society, it is in the nature of those sins that the only differences are to be found: Both philosophies exist as opposing sides of the same coin of government power. Both are as actively interventionist in the private, personal lives of the citizenry, and both are as opposed to a strict "neutrality" with regard to legislating moral turpitude as an ordinary function of government.

It might be natural for you to make the intellectual leap to the conclusion that "conservatism" is equivalent to "libertarianism," but that is not specifically true: "Conservatives" recognize the necessity of using government to keep the nation safe and to minimally regulate the economy and the nation's business climate in ways that "libertarians" consider an excessive interference. True "libertarianism" equates to the creation of an aristocracy of economic oligarchs, a la the dogmatic fantasies of Ayn Rand. We have seen on this forum repeated assertions of the kinds of silliness that "libertarians" often assert as practicable policies.

To be a "conservative" is to make the honorable choice of seeking the least possible use of government and to give every individual the greatest possible choice of how to live a useful and happy life. It is a willingness to permit each person to seek his or her own level, and to suffer the consequences of poor choices, but only up to the point of damage to the commonweal.

To be a "neo-conservative" is to seek to use government power to instill a program as a substitute for those choices, no less than that effort to substitute a different program for choices by the "liberal progressive interventionists." Both mistrust the innate ability of a citizen to choose his or her own path through life. Both would obtrude to the extent "they can get away with." Both would amend the Constitution to achieve their differing goals if that course were practicable, and both have tried repeatedly.

Excellent post Albert.

[ad5mb]

The liberals around here use the term neocon like thirteen year olds use the word queer. A generic term for anyone they don't like. No basis in fact for the accusation.

Use of the term neocon at QRZ says more about the users than those accused of the dreadful condition of neocon.

[W3MIV]

In reality, neo-conservatism is little more than an outgrowth of the politics of the Henry M. "Scoop" Jackson wing of the Democratic Party, just as social conservatism is little more than an outgrowth of the politics of the former southern wing of the Democratic Party. Neither of these political ideologies are Republican in origin.

To the extent that modern "neo-conservatism" is strongly oriented to a proactive role in international affairs and a very strong defense posture, I would agree. RR developed the "best" of Jackson's anti-Communism and pro-DOD policies into an effective tool in the expansion of neo-conservative politics. Jackson, however, did not give modern neo-conservatism its excessive involvement with narrowly moralist public policies.

As to "social conservatism" and its roots, I don't believe there is any universality in that term, not to even consider any unified group of policies that would separate them from "neo-conservatives" in general. There is no doubt that a large measure of the "moral-issues" foundation of much neo-conservatism comes from Southern roots, which almost entirely ties it to the formerly dominant "Southern-fried" style of Democrat politics.

In so far as "not Republican in origin," I would tend to agree that neither track is Republican in the sense of the Republican Party prior to the rise of Goldwater. Although Goldwater, himself, was not particularly a "neo-con" in strictly modern terms, his candidacy acted as a magnet for all of the various forms of political thought that were coalescing to form what has since become "neo-conservatism." Indeed, most modern "neo-cons" would hotly denounce many of Goldwater's beliefs, just as they have done with many of Buckley's.

I am of the view that the principle loss in modern "Conservatism" (including the "neo" offshoot) is an attachment to truly intellectual development; it is now all a knee-jerk reaction to the Left and shorn of any attachment to the kind of reason that would lead Buckley, for example, to call for legalization of marijuana or the stern denunciation of the current administration's responses to Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo.

[N3RQ]

As to "social conservatism" and its roots, I don't believe there is any universality in that term, not to even consider any unified group of policies that would separate them from "neo-conservatives" in general. There is no doubt that a large measure of the "moral-issues" foundation of much neo-conservatism comes from Southern roots, which almost entirely ties it to the formerly dominant "Southern-fried" style of Democrat politics.


Yesterday on WCBM 680AM, Sean and Frank were ragging on the Democratic Party for their stance against the Civil Rights Act of 1964. I could not help but chuckle because the wing of the Democratic Party that was against the passage of this bill is now the GOP base. It is amazing how Goldwater’s “Southern Strategy” has laundered this voting block clean of its former sins.

[W0MT]

To be a Neo-Con you need to believe:

1. Jesus loves you, and shares your hatred of homosexuals, protectors of the environment, and Hillary Clinton.

2. Saddam was a good guy when Reagan armed him, a bad guy when Bush's Daddy made war on him, a good guy when Cheney did business with him, and a bad guy when Bush needed a "we can't find Bin Laden" diversion.

3. Trade with Cuba is wrong because the country is Communist, but trade with China and Vietnam is vital to a spirit of international harmony.

4. The United States should get out of the United Nations, but our highest national priority is enforcing U.N. resolutions against Iraq .

5. A woman can't be trusted with decisions about her own body, but multinational drug corporations can make decisions affecting all mankind without regulation.

6. The best way to improve military morale is to praise the troops in speeches, while slashing veterans' benefits and combat pay.

7. If condoms are kept out of schools, adolescents won't have sex.

8. A good way to fight terrorism is to belittle our longtime allies, then demand their cooperation and money.

9. Providing health care to all Iraqis is sound policy, but providing health care to all Americans is socialism.

10. HMO's and insurance companies have the best interests of the public at heart.

11. Global warming and tobacco's link to cancer are junk science, but creationism should be taught in schools.

12. A president lying about an extramarital affair is an impeachable offense, but a president lying to enlist support for a war in which thousands die is solid defense policy.

13. Government should limit itself to the powers named in the Constitution, which include banning gay marriage and censoring the Internet .

14. The public has a right to know about Hillary's cattle trades, but George Bush's driving record is none of our business.

15. Being a drug addict is a moral failing and a crime, unless you're a conservative radio host. Then it's an illness and you need our prayers for your recovery.

16. Supporting "Executive Privilege" for every Republican ever born, who will be born or who might be born (in perpetuity.)

17. What Bill Clinton did in the 1960's is of vital national interest, but what Bush did in the '80's is irrelevant.

18. The right to life begins at conception and ends at birth.

19. Everything that has gone wrong during GWB’s term in office is Bill Clinton’s fault.

[ad5mb]

To be a Neo-Con you need to believe:

This will be quoted back to every juvenile liberal who accuses me of being a dreaded neocon every time they say it. Question appended:

"Which of these can you state with certainty are things I believe?"

I will never get an answer. They will never stop making the accusation.

Liberals are persistent. Stupid, but peristent.

[W3MIV]

Georges Santayana's admonition about the cost of forgetting history comes to mind. I fear we are, indeed, condemned to repeat those lessons we have not yet learned. Over the past couple of decades we have lost almost all of the intellectual content, both within government and without, and that void is resulting in ever sharper fangs loaded with venom in a national debate in which invective has displaced diplomacy and obdurate obstruction has substituted for principled compromise.

My concerns for the worsening scenario is a large measure of my support for Obama in this election. As "the new guy" he is the least vested in entrenchments, and his intellect may place him in a posture from which he may strike out on a new path.

Hope springs eternal. ;)

[W3MIV]

This will be quoted back to every juvenile liberal who accuses me of being a dreaded neocon every time they say it. Question appended:

"Which of these can you state with certainty are things I believe?"

I will never get an answer. They will never stop making the accusation.

Liberals are persistent. Stupid, but peristent.


Judging from the tenor of your post, I woud assume you are a liberal.

[KB9YCO]

The liberals around here use the term neocon like thirteen year olds use the word queer. A generic term for anyone they don't like. No basis in fact for the accusation.

Use of the term neocon at QRZ says more about the users than those accused of the dreadful condition of neocon.

Yes, sounds like the often misused word "liberal" that gets used on anyone left of Douche Limbaugh. Does anyone read anymore? Own a dictionary even? Oy. Meanwhile the people getting called liberal are anything but.
=============================
liberal:
favorable to or in accord with concepts of maximum individual freedom possible, esp. as guaranteed by law and secured by governmental protection of civil liberties.
open-minded or tolerant, esp. free of or not bound by traditional or conventional ideas, values, etc.
favoring or permitting freedom of action, esp. with respect to matters of personal belief or expression.

[ad4mg]

The liberals around here use the term neocon like thirteen year olds use the word queer. A generic term for anyone they don't like. No basis in fact for the accusation.

Use of the term neocon at QRZ says more about the users than those accused of the dreadful condition of neocon.

Can you feel it, ladies and gentlemen? The pure, seething, unadulterated hatred? This is a citizen toeing the party line of the new repubicants, the "Party of Hate". Bombing defenseless countries into democracies, imposing their will upon all others, the "borrow and spend, spend, spend", PNAC inspired, Lush Bimbo and the Excrement in Broadcasting tutored new world order conservative ... wiretapping soon in a town near you.

Almost as ridiculous as your spewage, eh? At least a bit more "colorful".

[kc7jty]

Is George W Bush a neo-con or a conservative? The term neo-con is as appropriate as the term white. It has a very definate and specific meaning.

[K2WH]

To be a Neo-Con you need to believe:

1. Jesus loves you, and shares your hatred of homosexuals, protectors of the environment, and Hillary Clinton.

2. Saddam was a good guy when Reagan armed him, a bad guy when Bush's Daddy made war on him, a good guy when Cheney did business with him, and a bad guy when Bush needed a "we can't find Bin Laden" diversion.

3. Trade with Cuba is wrong because the country is Communist, but trade with China and Vietnam is vital to a spirit of international harmony.

4. The United States should get out of the United Nations, but our highest national priority is enforcing U.N. resolutions against Iraq .

5. A woman can't be trusted with decisions about her own body, but multinational drug corporations can make decisions affecting all mankind without regulation.

6. The best way to improve military morale is to praise the troops in speeches, while slashing veterans' benefits and combat pay.

7. If condoms are kept out of schools, adolescents won't have sex.

8. A good way to fight terrorism is to belittle our longtime allies, then demand their cooperation and money.

9. Providing health care to all Iraqis is sound policy, but providing health care to all Americans is socialism.

10. HMO's and insurance companies have the best interests of the public at heart.

11. Global warming and tobacco's link to cancer are junk science, but creationism should be taught in schools.

12. A president lying about an extramarital affair is an impeachable offense, but a president lying to enlist support for a war in which thousands die is solid defense policy.

13. Government should limit itself to the powers named in the Constitution, which include banning gay marriage and censoring the Internet .

14. The public has a right to know about Hillary's cattle trades, but George Bush's driving record is none of our business.

15. Being a drug addict is a moral failing and a crime, unless you're a conservative radio host. Then it's an illness and you need our prayers for your recovery.

16. Supporting "Executive Privilege" for every Republican ever born, who will be born or who might be born (in perpetuity.)

17. What Bill Clinton did in the 1960's is of vital national interest, but what Bush did in the '80's is irrelevant.

18. The right to life begins at conception and ends at birth.

19. Everything that has gone wrong during GWB’s term in office is Bill Clinton’s fault.

Wow, you thought of all that by yourself?

K2WH (Neocon)

[K2WH]

Can you feel it, ladies and gentlemen? The pure, seething, unadulterated hatred? This is a citizen towing the party line of the new repubicants, the "Party of Hate". Bombing defenseless countries into democracies, imposing their will upon all others, the "borrow and spend, spend, spend", PNAC inspired, Lush Bimbo and the Excrement in Broadcasting tutored new world order conservative ... wiretapping soon in a town near you.

Almost as ridiculous as your spewage, eh? At least a bit more "colorful".

Gee, you almost made funny.

K2WH (Neocon)

[wa6ccw]

The liberals around here use the term neocon like thirteen year olds use the word queer. A generic term for anyone they don't like. No basis in fact for the accusation.

Use of the term neocon at QRZ says more about the users than those accused of the dreadful condition of neocon.

You've knocked it out of the park with an extremely accurate assessment, MB - kudos!

[kc7jty]

and his intellect may place him in a posture from which he may strike out on a new path.
Hope springs eternal. ;)
About as likely as a shot in the dark finding it's intended mark.

[W0MT]

Wow, you thought of all that by yourself?

K2WH (Neocon)

Actually no. I just read the wacko stuff posted by Neo-Cons and kept adding to the list. This stuff was thought up by them, I'm just reporting it back.

[ad5mb]

Almost as ridiculous as your spewage, eh? At least a bit more "colorful".

Your spewage is indeed more colorful.

But then, so is pizza vomit.

[nx6d]

Dim calling dimmer bright still equals dark...

You've knocked it out of the park with an extremely accurate assessment, MB - kudos!

[ad4mg]

I'm going to stop using the term "Neocon". It, by definition, isn't correct in many cases.

I propose a new term ... NWOC, for "New World Order Conservatives". It suggest the influence of the PNAC and it's goals, and also has a nice ring to it.

Of course, just like the Neocon, New World Order Conservatives have little to nothing in common with real Conservatives.

I think W0MT's post provides a dandy definition for the NWOC.

Yeah, a war mongering, uber right-wing, ditto-headed zealot is now a NWOC in my world.

[k4kyv]

I saw a good cartoon in to-day's newspaper on this topic.

It showed a Rush Limburger looking character, tagged "Right wing talk radio", foaming at the mouth in front of the microphone at AM radio station WAIL. On the other side of the studio room window you could see Ann Coulter sitting at the control board, remarking to some other dude, "Except for the wit, intelligence and charm, I like to think we're carrying on for good ol' Bill Buckley".

[W0MT]

I'm going to stop using the term "Neocon". It, by definition, isn't correct in many cases.

I propose a new term ... NWOC, for "New World Order Conservatives". It suggest the influence of the PNAC and it's goals, and also has a nice ring to it.

Of course, just like the Neocon, New World Order Conservatives have little to nothing in common with real Conservatives.

I think W0MT's post provides a dandy definition for the NWOC.

Yeah, a war mongering, uber right-wing, ditto-headed zealot is now a NWOC in my world.

While I think you have the right idea, NWOC just doesn't seem to do justice to the group. I suggest World Acclaimed Conservative Knights Of Salvation. Has a nice ring to it and of course, easily abbreviated as WACKOS.

[W3MIV]

While I think you have the right idea, NWOC just doesn't seem to do justice to the group. I suggest World Acclaimed Conservative Knights Of Salvation. Has a nice ring to it and of course, easily abbreviated as WACKOS.

It gets my vote!

[N1LAF]

Neoconservatism - is a political philosophy that emerged in the United States from the rejection of social liberalism and the New Left counterculture of the 1960s. It influenced the Ronald Reagan, George H. W. Bush, and the George W. Bush presidential administrations, representing a re-alignment in American politics, and the defection of liberals to the right-hand side of the political spectrum. One accomplishment was "to make criticism from the Right acceptable in the intellectual, artistic, and journalistic circles where conservatives had long been regarded with suspicion."Neoconservatism emphasizes foreign policy as paramount responsibility of government, seeing the need for the U.S. acting as the world's sole superpower as indispensable to establishing and maintaining global order.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoconservatism

New World OrderA pivotal point came with Bush’s 11 September 1990 "Toward a New World Order" speech (full text)to a joint session of Congress. This time it was Bush, not Gorbachev, whose idealism was compared to Woodrow Wilson, and to FDR at the creation of the UN.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_world_order

Trilateral CommissionThe Trilateral Commission is a private organization, established to foster closer cooperation between America, Europe and Japan. It was founded in July 1973, at the initiative of David Rockefeller; who was Chairman of the Council on Foreign Relations at that time. The Trilateral Commission is widely seen as a counterpart to the Council on Foreign Relations. He pushed the idea of including Japan at the Bilderberg meetings he was attending but was rebuffed. Along with Zbigniew Brzezinski and a few other people, including individuals from the Brookings Institution, Council on Foreign Relations and the Ford Foundation, he convened initial meetings out of which grew the Trilateral organization.
(Maybe this is the financial wing of the Neocon/New World Order folks)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trilateral_Commission

Paleoconservatism (sometimes shortened to paleo or paleocon when the context is clear) is a term for an anti-communist and anti-authoritarian right wing movement based in the United States that stresses tradition, civil society and classical federalism, along with familial, religious, regional, national and Western identity. Chilton Williamson, Jr. describes paleoconservatism as "the expression of rootedness: a sense of place and of history, a sense of self derived from forebears, kin, and culture — an identity that is both collective and personal.” Paleoconservativism is not expressed as an ideology and its adherents do not necessarily subscribe to any one party line.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paleoconservatism

William F. Buckley, Jr. is an unwitting influence on paleoconservatism
Pat Buchanan calls neoconservatism "a globalist, interventionist, open borders ideology.
The paleoconservatives argue that the "neocons" are illegitimate interlopers in the conservative movement.(infiltrators?)

[k0ews]

The liberals around here use the term neocon like thirteen year olds use the word queer. A generic term for anyone they don't like. No basis in fact for the accusation.
Both sides call names. I do enjoy and agree with your analogy of thirteen year olds, however. This place does resemble a Jr. High lunchroom.
What has made me less of a participant, and more of a spectator in these forums in the past few months is the lack of any intellectual discussion. People do disagree, and then they call names. The name calling either comes from deep seeded insecurity, deep seeded anger, intellectual laziness, or just lack of an ability to have an informed discussion.
Not every single person who voted for George W. Bush is a "neocon." Not every single person who voted for John Kerry in 04 is a "liberal." I'd venture to guess that every person that votes has at least one thing with which they disagree with the person they voted. It comes down to choices, really. Some people vote Republican because they are pro-life, period. No issue matters more and if the candidate is pro-life, they vote that way. They're called issue oriented voters. Some people vote Democrat every election, period, whether they agree with the candidate or not. It's all a matter of degree, really. Unfortunately, the past few elections, the American public has had their choice of people who cannot and will not cross party lines, and candidates that play to their party "base." The irony this year is that the most talked about, most popular candidate we've had has a very party line, un-remarkable career thus far in the Senate, and while shows great promise, and is a great orator, has really accomplished very little. Still, he's run a beautiful campaign.
The candidate that has repeatedly tried to find common ground in America, and has put his country before his party, and has accomplished a great deal in his political career; he's the most vilified person in his party, and even though he's probably the best qualified to bring about "change," he will undoubtedly be cast by the opposition as "the status quo," or "what's wrong in Washington." At the end of the day, however, America will probably only have those two choices. Folks who belong to neither party have to vote for one or the other, or don't vote. And, at the end of the day, at least here on the Zed, those who voted one way, they will get branded "neocon" and the others who voted the other way, they get branded "liberal;" at least by the insecure, the angry, or the intellectually lazy.

[kc2orw]

Yep they even call conservative leaning people liberals but we all know what it all really means in today's context.

NeoCon = Supporter of the Bush Doctrine and those that would have us continue in the vein.
Liberal = Anyone who doesn't support all of the above and then some and isn't voting for a Republican

If you think the Bush war in Iraq was wrong then you are a commie pinko, pansy, gay, welfarite, who wants to destroy their lives, whatever that is. Some of these folks are already getting government checks and yet they complain about entitlements :D

[wa6ccw]

Dim calling dimmer bright still equals dark...

Looks like I've yanked your chain, yet again, Daveeeeeeeeeee...

Again, you're SO easy.:D

[nx6d]

Looks like I've yanked your chain, yet again, Daveeeeeeeeeee...

Again, you're SO easy.:D

Heh...Keep patting yourself on the back, CCW, if it makes you feel good.

You couldn't "yank my chain" if you tried.

Crow away, little man. I know that makes you feel like "one of the guys".

Pathetic.

[ad5mb]

NX6D, see the post about GOOGLEHACKING QRZ in Rag Chew.

You are the star of that show.

[nx6d]

NX6D, see the post about GOOGLEHACKING QRZ in Rag Chew.

You are the star of that show.

Thanks for the attention, new guy. If you think you're embarrassing me, you're sadly mistaken. You're only making yourself look foolish.

You and your 58 whole posts I guess make you some kind of expert.

As Eric said, sometimes this place is like the Jr. High lunchroom.

You have now appointed yourself the official lunchroom monitor. Don't get cocky with your new responsibilities, junior.

I don't care if you disagree with me. That's part of the process. Just don't whine if you get a response to a dumb or unproveable post.

I have a very low tolerance level for talk radio bs, lies and deliberate misrepresentations. If you don't like it, that's too bad.

Take your tender sensibilities elsewhere if you can't hack being challenged.

Dave NX6D
Modoc County, CA

[ad5mb]

Ignorance and arrogance, demonstrated.

Former KD5KFL.

I'm the guy who said this place was like junior high. Eric repeated what I said. I have been posting that for years.

talk radio BS. I have never listened to talk radio in my life. One more time you make a prononcement from God with no basis in reality.

I reiterate: There is not one post anywhere where you have a single polite thing to say to or about another person.

Just stating a fact there.

[nx6d]

duplicate post...

[nx6d]

In your zealous attempt at character assassination you obviously are mistaken.

I don't recall the KD5 callsign. You obviously made a huge impression on me.

http://forums.qrz.com/showthread.php?t=154419&page=3

Just one example. That's one more example than you deserve.

Again, I don't care about your politics and your response to mine. Keep your uninformed opinions about my posts to yourself.

You are continuing to make yourself look like a complete idiot, especially with the comment about talk radio. For someone who doesn't "listen to talk radio", you sure have all the cliches down pat. Do you think people are that stupid that they wouldn't see the similiarities?

I'm not responding to you further, so babble on, station.

Dave NX6D
Modoc County, CA


Ignorance and arrogance, demonstrated.

Former KD5KFL.

I'm the guy who said this place was like junior high. Eric repeated what I said. I have been posting that for years.

talk radio BS. I have never listened to talk radio in my life. One more time you make a prononcement from God with no basis in reality.

I reiterate: There is not one post anywhere where you have a single polite thing to say to or about another person.

Just stating a fact there.

[wa6ccw]

Heh...Keep patting yourself on the back, CCW, if it makes you feel good.

You couldn't "yank my chain" if you tried.

Crow away, little man. I know that makes you feel like "one of the guys".

Pathetic.


Yes, yes, say whatever it takes to make yourself feel better, Daveeee...

And you wonder why you serve as a cheap form of entertainment to the masses. http://www.mysmiley.net/imgs/smile/evilgrin/evilgrin0007.gif

[KA8DKT]

Can you feel it, ladies and gentlemen? The pure, seething, unadulterated hatred? This is a citizen towing the party line of the new repubicants, the "Party of Hate". Bombing defenseless countries into democracies, imposing their will upon all others, the "borrow and spend, spend, spend", PNAC inspired, Lush Bimbo and the Excrement in Broadcasting tutored new world order conservative ... wiretapping soon in a town near you.

Almost as ridiculous as your spewage, eh? At least a bit more "colorful".That's toeing the party line, unless you are using some kind of hook and truck.

-gary

[ad4mg]

That's toeing the party line, unless you are using some kind of hook and truck.

-gary

Not at all. You missed the signature, I'm sure it was there. Currently, I despise both political parties, it's just that I have a special hatred of the current administration and the politicians associated with it because of the incredible damage they've done to this country.

I'll have to look, but that is my standard response to an uber right-wing spewage of some type.

It's awful to see someone make an assumption like you did and be so wrong. Again, see signature for clarification.

[k0ews]

Ignorance and arrogance, demonstrated.

Former KD5KFL.

I'm the guy who said this place was like junior high. Eric repeated what I said. I have been posting that for years.

talk radio BS. I have never listened to talk radio in my life. One more time you make a prononcement from God with no basis in reality.

I reiterate: There is not one post anywhere where you have a single polite thing to say to or about another person.

Just stating a fact there.

There are plenty of times Dave has been civil in these forums. I've recieved many of those responses myself.
By the way, I LOVE your "Jr. High Lunchroom" analogy, and fully agree (I'm a teacher, so I have personal experience on this)
Dave really is a good guy. My brother, AC0H, and Dave are politically opposite as day and night. Yet when Dave was banned, my brother was one of his ardent supporters. Republicans and Democrats, like cats and dogs, need each other. I ask you, where would the Coyote be without the Road Runner? Where would Foghorn Leghorn be without the Chicken Hawk? Bugs without Elmer?
Since I am a teacher, I deal with people; all day long. All kinds of people, from all kinds of backgrounds. I live in QRZ the same way I live there. Give respect to get respect. I'll bet you the farm that if you were to actually ask Dave a question, with sincere respect, about an issue and not infer or imply anything at all about Dave, he would answer you sincerely, and respectfully back. I'll bet I could do the same with you or most of the other posters on this forum. Even if you don't get respect in return, if you ask with respect, than you have your "self respect" intact at all times.
Funny thing; all you political oppenents out there, if you were talking about RADIO, would probably get along just fine, and agree on much.
Try to get along, folks.

Now, to the original topic, yes Buckley was the archetypal modern conservative. He pre-dates the Neoconservative movement, and is the classic model conservative. There are a few of these guys running around yet, but they're in the minority. Agree or disagree with Buckley, intellectually, one had to respect him.

[ad5mb]

Keep your uninformed opinions about my posts to yourself.

You are continuing to make yourself look like a complete idiot, especially with the comment about talk radio. For someone who doesn't "listen to talk radio", you sure have all the cliches down pat. Do you think people are that stupid that they wouldn't see the similiarities?

I'm not responding to you further, so babble on, station.

1) My name is not station. In 53 years of living, I have never met a person named station.

2) You say I have all the cliches down pat, but you never heard of me. One way or the other, Mr. Personality. These statements are mutually incompatible.

3) "I'm not responding..." Yeah, stick your fingers in your ears and shout. Works for 4 year olds.

4) Not uninformed opinions. Observations of reality. You are rude, mean, insulting and abusive. I see this in every post you make. I will not keep my observations to myself. Every time you make a rude obnoxious remark on QRZ I will be in your face. For the rest of your life. Do what you are going to do when you find out you are not getting your way, because you are not getting your way.

K0EWS:
By the way, I LOVE your "Jr. High Lunchroom" analogy, and fully agree (I'm a teacher, so I have personal experience on this)

Me, too. I taught electronics in a military intelligence unit in the Army. All my students had an IQ of at least 125 and a drill sergeant to handle discipline problems. I'm sure my classroom experiences are very different from yours, and I don't envy you.

QRZ is by no means the only place adults behave like junior high brats. Observations from a lifetime of doing high pay, high tech work in small towns:

There are two kinds of people in small towns: From Heres and Come Heres. The From Heres are all quite satisfied with their position in the pecking order, established using techniques they learned in junior high. The Come Heres show up making more money, living in a nicer neighborhoods, and driving nicer vehicles than the From Heres ever aspired to. Which causes every From Here to present themselves and demonstrate their pathetic juvenile pecking order establishing techniques. Which have no effect on me.

If you are aware of this and look for it, you see it everywhere. Lunch counters, bars, the workplace .

[n2ize]

I don't see what the neocon's are complaining about. If it were me I'd rather be called neocon rather than fascist.
:cool::)

[W3MIV]

I don't see what the neocon's are complaining about. If it were me I'd rather be called neocon rather than fascist.


That would depend upon who is slinging the mud. And, for the record, it is "if it were I." "Me" is the wrong case.

[k0ews]

Me, too. I taught electronics in a military intelligence unit in the Army. All my students had an IQ of at least 125 and a drill sergeant to handle discipline problems. I'm sure my classroom experiences are very different from yours, and I don't envy you.

You have a very interesting personal history. I don't have it all that bad; I teach band, which means that by and large, my clientelle are the above average academic kids with very good family support at home. However, I do see those Jr. High behaviors. I enjoy what I do, and really enjoy the challenge!

Now, a question for you, and I'm serious here. In your years as an instructor in the military, over time, did you see any changes in the kind of kids coming into the service? Just curious.

[KA8DKT]

Not at all. You missed the signature, I'm sure it was there. Currently, I despise both political parties, it's just that I have a special hatred of the current administration and the politicians associated with it because of the incredible damage they've done to this country.

I'll have to look, but that is my standard response to an uber right-wing spewage of some type.

It's awful to see someone make an assumption like you did and be so wrong. Again, see signature for clarification.I'm sorry? I was just clarifying a spelling error...

-gary

[ad4mg]

I'm sorry? I was just clarifying a spelling error...

-gary

Bwaaa! And to think I wasted the time it took to pen such an eloquent reply ...

"towing" is a service offered autos

"toeing" is a service utilized by "ubers"

Silly me ...

[ad5mb]

Now, a question for you, and I'm serious here. In your years as an instructor in the military, over time, did you see any changes in the kind of kids coming into the service? Just curious.

I was in from '73 to '77, taught in '76 and '77. Not enough time to spot those changes.

What I did see: My instructors included:

A ceramics engineer, who made a point of pointing out that ceramics engineers design integrated circuits, not toilets;

A real sanitation engineer, who got real worked up over garbage truck drivers hijacking that worthy title;

And a computer scientist. All recent graduates, drafted when they got out of college. All wasted their education; four years having passed since they did what they were trained to do. Lack of recent experience rendered their education useless. All enlisted for four years to avoid one year of combat infantry service in Vietnam, which is quite understandable. All of them ended up working as electronic techs, despite their education.

When people talk about the unfairness of the draft, they usually mean it is unfair to poor people who could not get a student deferment. Seems to me these guys took a hit, too. But a hit in the USA, where they were warm, dry and not getting shot at.