|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
bucheon bum
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
 Posted: Wed Jul 31, 2013 7:27 am Post subject: |
 |
|
Catman, do you know what a neo-con is? Because you don't sound like you do.
They don't really care about domestic policies, and generally are in agreement with Dems on social causes (such as abortion, immigration, etc). They're all about foreign policy.
No one would claim Palin, Bachmann, and Santorum are neo-cons... Well except those who don't know any better (no, not saying you're one of them)... |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Nowhere Man
Joined: 08 Feb 2004
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 31, 2013 8:58 am Post subject: ... |
|
|
That's a bit unfair. To counterbalance, I'd like to see anywhere that Rove and Wolfowitz "seethed" at their Christian compadres.
A quick google looks like:
| Quote: |
Jul 4, 2008 - Karl Rove used a speech on Friday before a prominent anti-abortion group to attack Senator Barack Obama for his abortion rights positions |
| Quote: |
| Feb 10, 2012 - Karl Rove did his best to shamelessly conflate the morning after pill, which is emergency contraception to prevent pregnancy, |
Wolfie performs better. He sticks to the global. I still don't see any contempt displayed for the Christian right.
And, just as an absurdity check, does this thread not currently feature Titus, some fascinating vein of right winger, trying to write off the post-2000 neo-cons as leftists?
Read a lot of books, has he?
Make sure you have a window seat on your flight to Tralfamadore. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bucheon bum
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 31, 2013 10:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Since when was Karl Rove considered a neo-con?? A republican in support of an aggressive foreign policy doesn't automatically mean a neo-con. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
catman
Joined: 18 Jul 2004
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 01, 2013 2:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
| bucheon bum wrote: |
Catman, do you know what a neo-con is? Because you don't sound like you do.
They don't really care about domestic policies, and generally are in agreement with Dems on social causes (such as abortion, immigration, etc). They're all about foreign policy.
No one would claim Palin, Bachmann, and Santorum are neo-cons... Well except those who don't know any better (no, not saying you're one of them)... |
Well I've already shown that they have supported the Christian right on social causes. Unless you don't consider Bush and his cabinet to be neo-cons. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bucheon bum
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
| catman wrote: |
| bucheon bum wrote: |
Catman, do you know what a neo-con is? Because you don't sound like you do.
They don't really care about domestic policies, and generally are in agreement with Dems on social causes (such as abortion, immigration, etc). They're all about foreign policy.
No one would claim Palin, Bachmann, and Santorum are neo-cons... Well except those who don't know any better (no, not saying you're one of them)... |
Well I've already shown that they have supported the Christian right on social causes. Unless you don't consider Bush and his cabinet to be neo-cons. |
Wolfowitz, Bolton, Richard Pearle. There are a couple others whose names escape me. None of them were in cabinet positions, but certainly had influence in the Bush WH. Rumsfeld was certainly sympathetic to neo-cons and it fit his agenda. He was neutral on social causes.
And sorry, where did you show they supported the Christian right on social causes? I just re-read this thread and didn't see anything. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
catman
Joined: 18 Jul 2004
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
| bucheon bum wrote: |
| catman wrote: |
| bucheon bum wrote: |
Catman, do you know what a neo-con is? Because you don't sound like you do.
They don't really care about domestic policies, and generally are in agreement with Dems on social causes (such as abortion, immigration, etc). They're all about foreign policy.
No one would claim Palin, Bachmann, and Santorum are neo-cons... Well except those who don't know any better (no, not saying you're one of them)... |
Well I've already shown that they have supported the Christian right on social causes. Unless you don't consider Bush and his cabinet to be neo-cons. |
Wolfowitz, Bolton, Richard Pearle. There are a couple others whose names escape me. None of them were in cabinet positions, but certainly had influence in the Bush WH. Rumsfeld was certainly sympathetic to neo-cons and it fit his agenda. He was neutral on social causes.
And sorry, where did you show they supported the Christian right on social causes? I just re-read this thread and didn't see anything. |
Well first do you consider President Bush and the cabinet to be neo-cons? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bucheon bum
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 01, 2013 6:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
| catman wrote: |
| bucheon bum wrote: |
| catman wrote: |
| bucheon bum wrote: |
Catman, do you know what a neo-con is? Because you don't sound like you do.
They don't really care about domestic policies, and generally are in agreement with Dems on social causes (such as abortion, immigration, etc). They're all about foreign policy.
No one would claim Palin, Bachmann, and Santorum are neo-cons... Well except those who don't know any better (no, not saying you're one of them)... |
Well I've already shown that they have supported the Christian right on social causes. Unless you don't consider Bush and his cabinet to be neo-cons. |
Wolfowitz, Bolton, Richard Pearle. There are a couple others whose names escape me. None of them were in cabinet positions, but certainly had influence in the Bush WH. Rumsfeld was certainly sympathetic to neo-cons and it fit his agenda. He was neutral on social causes.
And sorry, where did you show they supported the Christian right on social causes? I just re-read this thread and didn't see anything. |
Well first do you consider President Bush and the cabinet to be neo-cons? |
Nope. But other advisors (such as the ones mentioned above) were. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
catman
Joined: 18 Jul 2004
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 02, 2013 3:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
| bucheon bum wrote: |
| catman wrote: |
| bucheon bum wrote: |
| catman wrote: |
| bucheon bum wrote: |
Catman, do you know what a neo-con is? Because you don't sound like you do.
They don't really care about domestic policies, and generally are in agreement with Dems on social causes (such as abortion, immigration, etc). They're all about foreign policy.
No one would claim Palin, Bachmann, and Santorum are neo-cons... Well except those who don't know any better (no, not saying you're one of them)... |
Well I've already shown that they have supported the Christian right on social causes. Unless you don't consider Bush and his cabinet to be neo-cons. |
Wolfowitz, Bolton, Richard Pearle. There are a couple others whose names escape me. None of them were in cabinet positions, but certainly had influence in the Bush WH. Rumsfeld was certainly sympathetic to neo-cons and it fit his agenda. He was neutral on social causes.
And sorry, where did you show they supported the Christian right on social causes? I just re-read this thread and didn't see anything. |
Well first do you consider President Bush and the cabinet to be neo-cons? |
Nope. But other advisors (such as the ones mentioned above) were. |
What definition are you using to define a neo-conservative? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stilicho25
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
