Do We Really Need To Have This Discussion Again?

Posted on July 22, 2006

About every 3 to 4 months or so we have to have a little pow wow on here or on our own respective blogs about the term “neo-con”. Let’s AGAIN take a look at the “word”.

Neo: From the Greek meaning New

Merriam-Webster Online:

1 a : new : recent b : new and different period or form of : in a new and different form or manner c : New World d : new and abnormal
2 : new chemical compound isomeric with or otherwise related to (such) a compound

So the term means new… right?

con: a shortened word meaning “conservative” so let’s look into conservative.

Merriam-Webster Online:

Main Entry: 2conservative
Function: noun
1 a : an adherent or advocate of political conservatism b capitalized : a member or supporter of a conservative political party
2 a : one who adheres to traditional methods or views b : a cautious or discreet person

Ok… Then a neo-con must be a “new conservative” then… right?

The politics of a “New Conservative” are a strange mixture of liberalism and nationalism. A “neo-con” is more often than not, a Democrat who sobered up and realized that he was on the wrong side of the political fence.

A “neo-con” is someone who is strong on national defense issues and a tax and spender. Someone like the President. But let’s make sure. What does Merriam-Webster online say?

Function: noun
1 : a former liberal espousing political conservatism
2 : a conservative who advocates the assertive promotion of democracy and U.S. national interest in international affairs including through military means

So I’m right! Again! What else is new.

A Neo Conservative is a Democrat who sobered up. But not all the way.

Then what in the Hell was Pat Buchanan regurgitating about in this video

Then there is an idiot named Glen Greenwald who until yesterday was completely off my radar. He like the Koolaid Kids at Daily POS has nothing but ass munching morons to inflate his ego commenting on his site. A site mind you that is hosted on Blogger. If he ever hopes to be a powerhouse in the blogosphere, he is going to need to drop that lame platform.

His ideas are weak and his argument weaker. He plays into the stereotype of the uneducated and the ignorant. And the lemmings are eating it up.

Like Deborah Frisch, he is quickly eating up his 15 minutes of fame and not saying anything of substance rather the opposite. Making claims about a so-called group of American political thinkers who he does not agree with.

It is mental midgets like Greenwald and Frisch who don’t know how to open a dictionary and look up what a term that they misuse actually means.

Nice try Glen… but like a blind marksman you not only miss the target but you are shooting in the wrong direction.

Update: Chris Matthews and Pat Buchanan got on Michelle Malkin’s nerves too.
Watch her vent at Hot Air.