Dec 21, 2009 -- 4:37PM, mecdukebec wrote:

Dec 21, 2009 -- 4:24PM, Jasr wrote:

Dec 21, 2009 -- 4:13PM, Armwar wrote:

Then please be aware that I personally am highly insulted by the term neocon as I know it to be anti-Semitic...meaning those Jews who want to take over the world...

This is an invention of the right to put the neoconservatives' critics on the defensive.

It's not working.

So, when Wm. Kristol (R.I.P.) wrote of his neoconservative views in the 1979 article "Confessions of a True, Self-Confessed 'Neoconservative.'--and who just happened to be Jewish, he was being anti-Semitic?

 -- >> Is there something of the logic of Wingnutery that is not clear to me, here? 

No... if you criticize Kristol, or any of the other pasty, draft-dodging, career officer-firing, intelligence-cooking, patriotism-questioning, war-mongering-on-a-credit card political hacks you are doing it because they are Jewish, not because they are draft-dodging, career officer-firing, intelligence-cooking, patriotism-questioning, war mongering on a credit card political hacks.

Mec, in those days, the term neocon was not a code word...it has become such...a wink/wink ---nudge/nudge sort of things by those "inthe know"...sort of like wingnutery...a way to avoid real dialogue and exchange of ideas by those intolerant of the mere thought of a political belief different from one's own...isn't that how you view fundamentalistic beliefs?  that all others are not to be tolerated, that those who dare to have them are to be treated ugly, shunned, banned, called names, etc.? leading to who knows what kind of treatment ultimately by those "in the know"?  because of self-righteousness? 

am I to be burned at the stake, or sent to some "camp" because I dare to think differently from the majority here on this board? 

what is the end result of zealotry?

Dec 21, 2009 -- 4:55PM, Armwar wrote:

towards what end, Jasr?  it is what I believe...how I take it...

I am not here to win anyone over or to make points...are you all?  I am trying to dialogue, and this is what I believe, that the liberals in general are anti-Israel, anti-Semitic, that the term neocon is a thinly-veiled code word for such. 

That is my opinion, of which I am the sole expert...though I will share what I think with you, and if you are put off by what I say, then you are...

A.  There is a difference between opposing the sometimes shocking behaviors of the state of Israel against its neighbors and the people who live within its borders (such as knocking down houses with old men in beds upstairs, shooting children who throw rocks at tanks, and firing rockets into mosques or office buildings to kill one person and taking out 40 innocent people) and being antisemitic, even if there are those on the right who have difficulty with this concept.  Bad behavior is bad behavior, and those who behave badly should be called on it, whether they are Jewish, Muslim, Christian, or atheist. 

B.  There are plenty of neocons who are NOT Jewish.  The neocons believe in American empire.  

Dec 21, 2009 -- 5:00PM, Armwar wrote:

Mec, in those days, the term neocon was not a code word...it has become such...

Hi Gail!

Here words from a friend who can help you out:

Indeed, as late as 1979, Irving Kristol — invariably described as the "Godfather of Neoconservatism" — wrote an ironically titled essay "Confessions of a True, Self-Confessed 'Neoconservative.'" The essay was written largely in response to an antagonistic book written by a "democratic socialist" named Peter Steinfels (now like Irving's son William with the New York Times), lamenting that these new conservatives were dangerously invigorating the Right. Kristol embraced the label, despite the pejorative intent behind it. "I myself have accepted the term," Kristol wrote, "perhaps because, having been named Irving, I am relatively indifferent to baptismal caprice. But I may be the only living self-confessed neoconservative, at large or in captivity."

CLICK

Ty Ur2, but yes, I am on trial here...that much has always been obvious to me.  I am today's witch in the eyes of the slavering left, who get off to the idea of burning me at the stake...as you see here.

Ty again, dear old friend (?lol?!)...I love to read your posts, btw.  You often say far more logically and directly what I wish I could say---I know I am too emotional in my posts, but, hey!  this is an emotional time for me...

There are posters here who email me, who cheer me up, and I am deeply grateful to you...all...

I represent main-stream America, my views right in the middle, btw...but that isn't acceptable to the hard-liners you find raucous and vociferous on this board.   Look at the Gallup Polls on any subject.  Where you see 50% having a certain opinion on just about anything, that is likely my opinion, too.  Why America elected these fools is totally beyond me, but I have faith that they just overreacted to the economic thing and will correct their mistake in spades.

As I said, the left may win a battle or two, but it will lose big time in the long run, as well it should.