It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Conservative vs. NeoConservative

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 31 2006 @ 12:30 AM
link   
Before Bush came into office, I was a conservative Republican and seen widely as a 'hawk on defense.' With the NeoCons coming out of the caves and becoming known, that term 'hawk' has all but disappeared from the lexicon. NeoCons (former liberals) make the old conservatives seem like doves. It's absurd. There is nothing traditionally conservative about NeoConservatism.



Realists, Isolationists, and Neocons: A Primer
An interview with Scott McConnell of The American Conservative
by Kevin Zeese
Scott McConnell is the editor of The American Conservative, a magazine he founded with Pat Buchanan and Taki Theodoracopulos in 2002. McConnell has a Ph.D. in history from Columbia University and was formerly the editorial page editor of The New York Post. He has been a columnist for Antiwar.com and New York Press. His work has been published in Commentary, Fortune, National Review, The New Republic, and many other publications.
www.antiwar.com...




posted on Jan, 31 2006 @ 12:53 AM
link   
I think there's a lot of confusion out there (mostly among younger people) among folks who support Bush and consider themselves to be conservative. Read Pat Buchanan. He is an isolationist, mostly; but he is one of the last true remnants of the Reagan Republicans. He's a paleo/conservative, or more traditional, like Reagain (who he worked for). And Reagan follows after Goldwater. They are nothing like the Neo Conservatives. I hope this info. I posted sheds some light on the differences. It's very important to understand.



posted on Jan, 31 2006 @ 01:09 AM
link   
Eastcoast good luck trying to tell people that Bush may not be a conserative. I had this debate with a left wing Aunt I tried to point out that Bush has done some unconserative things but she was to stubon to see my point of view.
Im glad Bush is a problem for American voters and not me.

If Bush is a conserative then I dont have a political ID which may not be so bad


As he stood on the stage, denouncing corporate socialism and foreign wars, that calm, clear voice ringing with modest sincerity, I thought: no wonder they’re so afraid of him that they’ve hired an army of corporate lawyers to deny him ballot status and shut down his campaign.

I know Ralph Nader is supposed to be a man of the Left, the Eugene Debs or the Norman Thomas of our times, but as I listen to him on the stump, I keep hearing the voice of the Old Right

link

I know the article is old but it still says a awfull lot. Putting Watergate aside I like Nixons version of consertativesm that is more power to state governments and that government cant solve every problem.

[edit on 31-1-2006 by xpert11]

[edit on 31-1-2006 by xpert11]



posted on Jan, 31 2006 @ 05:05 PM
link   
The neo-cons are the worst thing to ever happen to the republican party. They have turned away from traditional republican and conservative values. What ever happen to reasonable fiscal policy and states rights. The republicans came to power back in the nineties to make governmnet more accountable to the people "the era of big government is over" said Newt Gingrich. But government is bigger and more bloated than ever. And is even less accountable. WHAT THE HELL HAPPENED!!!



posted on Feb, 4 2006 @ 07:13 PM
link   
I know what you mean. I'm a paleo-conservative. I'm an isolationist.

It seems that there's a battle between neo-cons and liberals, and the conservatives are on the sidelines. Just the way it feels.



posted on Feb, 4 2006 @ 07:18 PM
link   
Yeah its like we don't even have a voice anymore.
After Bush gets gone we need to all get together and get conservatism back on track.



posted on Feb, 4 2006 @ 07:20 PM
link   
Try Constitution Party. It's comprised of conservatives, Christians, and fed-up Republicans.

I'm a recovering Republican myself.


Constitution Party



posted on Feb, 4 2006 @ 07:34 PM
link   
I've heard alot about the Constitution Party and a like alot of their platforms. However their in the same boat that all third parties are. That nobody takes them seriously and that the only thing that the Democrats and Republicans hate more than each other is a third party. I mean a third party has only succeeded once in our entire history and that was the republican. Their have been some notable failures such as the bull moose party and the reform party as of late. Right now I believe are only option is to take back the Republican party. If that fails, the Constitution Party may indeed become the next home of conservatism.



posted on Feb, 5 2006 @ 03:41 PM
link   
Howard Dean, as governor, and presidential candidate was way more fiscally conservative than Bush has ever been.
That's one of the main things I liked about him.

The only way we'll ever be able to legitimize third parties (from the grass roots level) is if we keep voting for them. Back in the '96 presidential primaries, I voted for Pat Buchanan over Bob Dole. Buchanan was an independent Republican and Dole was a sold-out party boy.
My county (in South Carolina) was one of the only two to go Buchanan.


He's a real Reagan/Goldwater Republican.



posted on Feb, 5 2006 @ 04:27 PM
link   
I think the Constitution Party got about 1000 votes from my county (Wayne) alone. Wayne County is in a fairly rural area, too--lots of Amish around.

I live in the county seat (Wooster), which has about 24,000 people.



posted on Feb, 5 2006 @ 05:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by EastCoastKid
Howard Dean, as governor, and presidential candidate was way more fiscally conservative than Bush has ever been.
That's one of the main things I liked about him.


The only difference between the two is the amount they've squandered. If Dean had access to as much money as Bush, he'd be worse.


Democratic leaders on Capitol Hill are privately bristling over Howard Dean’s management of the Democratic National Committee and have made those sentiments clear after new fundraising numbers showed he has spent nearly all the committee’s cash and has little left to support their efforts to gain seats this cycle, ROLL CALL reports.
Where's the money?



posted on Feb, 6 2006 @ 10:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by jsobecky

Originally posted by EastCoastKid
Howard Dean, as governor, and presidential candidate was way more fiscally conservative than Bush has ever been.
That's one of the main things I liked about him.


The only difference between the two is the amount they've squandered. If Dean had access to as much money as Bush, he'd be worse.


Democratic leaders on Capitol Hill are privately bristling over Howard Dean’s management of the Democratic National Committee and have made those sentiments clear after new fundraising numbers showed he has spent nearly all the committee’s cash and has little left to support their efforts to gain seats this cycle, ROLL CALL reports.
Where's the money?




Getting your (dis)info from sister toldja, are you?


Here's an ad from the margin of this blog...



Blogs in support and defense of the defiant FOX NEWS CHANNEL. Also featured - articles about the Main Stream Media (MSM) and journalism.
sistertoldjah.com...


The only difference between the two is the amount they've squandered...

So you acknowledge that Bush is no conservative and that he has squandered the public's money. If that's the case, why do you spend so much time defending him (when he's screwing you over, just the same)? Makes no sense at all.



posted on Feb, 7 2006 @ 12:28 AM
link   
Exactly Bush is just as bad as the Dems ever were in his irresponsiblity with the budget and his indifference towards common americans problems. The Republican party used to be the party of the common man but now its just a whore of big business. It used to be about responsible government now they cowtow to any special interest willing to write them a check regardless of what they're asking from minor political favors to amending the constitution, it all makes me sick.



posted on Feb, 7 2006 @ 07:31 PM
link   
That the only defense you got, to attack a source?

How about these:
Washington Times
Liberty Post
Roll Call

(Dis)info my arse. Defend the loser all you want, you can't change the facts by chaging the subject.



posted on Feb, 7 2006 @ 09:36 PM
link   
They are all pathetic.


I look forward to the time when people stop frothing at the mouth over which moron is worse... and focus upon what has led our country to have a political system where the only choices are from a pool of morons...



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join