Isn't it true that neo-cons label all who dislike Bush or Rush a liberal?

Question

As an independent thinker, my being anti-gun control, anti-abortion, anti- big government, pro-public education, pro- middle class, pro-Clinton era economics, pro-God means nothing to neo-cons.

If one likes or dislikes Bush is seems to be neo-con's only litmus test. Am I wrong?

Answer 1

That seems to be the tendency among at least many of them.

I've been incorrectly labeled a liberal many times based on my opposition of Bush, and nothing I say seemed to convince those people that they were mistaken. See the answer above me for one example of this delusion.

The term "liberal" has become a meaningless label, because it has completely different meanings by the people who call themselves that, versus the people who label others as that.

Answer 2

Certainly the ditto heads tend to label anyone who questions Rush's spiel as liberal or anti-American. And the neo-con advisers to Bush were adamant in labeling anyone who questioned the rush to war, or the disaster that it has become as liberal, anti-American, or worse. Even today with the calamity that we now face with Iraq, the continued death and destruction, there is a tendency for those who support the actions of Bush and Cheney to label the opposition as disloyal liberal terrorist sympathizers. However there are any number of true conservatives who are now opposed to what this administration has done.

Answer 3

Well, Chi, you know the generalizing goes *both* ways.

Not every conservative is a neocon, nor is every conservative automatically a hard-core Republican. As you know ;o) I am a conservative Libertarian - I just distrust the left more than the right.

And I'm also anti-gun control, somewhat pro-choice, DEFINITELY anti-big government, pro-public education (but get back to teaching basics and drop the feel-good BS), BIG split on Clinton (surprised, aren't you?) and I'm definitely pro-God.

Answer 4

No you're not wrong at all, neo-conservatives have alienated a large segment of the population, independent thinkers like yourself who are socially conservative yet fiscally progressive.

Perhaps the neo-conservative stranglehold will be lessened if the Republicans elect a not so divisive political candidate in the upcoming election. I base this on the fact that it seems the recent congressional election has sort of reduced the power of neo-conservatives within the Republican leadership.

Answer 5

Well, aren't they? I'm sure it's also true that the Liberals
label all who like Bush and Rush a "neo-con". It"s sorta
tit-for-tat, isn't it? Just like little children. We'll destroy
ourselves if we don't work harder at being "united" as in
United States (which we used to be).

Answer 6

It does seem that way, doesn't it? But I think that there are reasonable neo-cons out there somewhere who can actually believe that someone does not like Bush do not automatically label them as a "lib" or a "dem."

Answer 7

You calling names and then claiming to be a Christian isn't putting a very christian occasion. we are able to ignore that for a 2d. The word Christian = "Christ-like". maximum folk evaluate Bush to be a Christian. different than accusing him of your opinion what evidence are you offering to help us answer your accusation of his liberalism, or him no longer being a Christian. Christians think of Jesus Christ is the Savior no longer Bush. i think of possibly ask your mommy before you submit your time table interior the form of a question, or provide extra info.

Answer 8

Did you happen to notice that, in your own post, you are labeling everyone who doesn't agree with your world view as a "neo-con".

Does that make you a solipsist or a narcissist?

Answer 9

I'm not a neocon but a conservative and no it's not true we think this way, it's only what you accuse us of thinking! Some conservatives may feel like you do about some of the issues and that sure doesn't make them liberal. You attack to much, enjoy life more!

Answer 10

Yea Chi...

Just because you vote for liberal policies and against conservative policies doesnt mean your a liberal !!

uh... it doesn't? thats news to me. Then what does it make you? A Mexican? Oh, i gotcha.

A "Liberal" is not an insulting word, however i find it funny that you think it is, when you are a liberal. IT MAKES NO SENSE! golly... that sounds typical.

Liberal =
- favoring or permitting freedom of action, esp. with respect to matters of personal belief or expression
- 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.
- noting or pertaining to a political party advocating measures of progressive political reform.
- favorable to progress or reform, as in political or religious affairs.

That's what a "liberal" is... Its almost pathetic that i have to teach you what "liberal" means because you dont know what it means yourself and you never had the common sense to look it up yourself... its even more pathetic that you dont know what the word "liberal" means, yet you try and insult conservatives by stressing pro-liberal policies and anti-conservative rhetoric...

Its like an identity crisis or denial or something... that or your just dumb... *.- .. =P

The fact that you interpretted the CONNOTATION and not the DENOTATION of the word liberal, when it is who you are and how you think... The fact that you defined, in your head, the word LIBERAL by its connotation rather then its denotation is PROOF to me that liberals dont understand ANYTHING conservatives try to point out to them because they value their own beliefs or attitude about the subject more then they value the undeniable facts layed out infront of them!

Its mindblowing to me that i can show an anti-administration voter this link, and this detailed investigation report...
http://www.iraqwatch.org/government/US/CIA/ISG-Iraqs_WMD_Vol1small.pdf

and they still think Bush wrongly entered Iraq for one of their many made-up accusations or conspiracies or ... w/e is "IN" at the time...

ITS NOT TRUE, WE HAD TO GO INTO IRAQ SOONER OR LATER, AND 2003 WAS A MILITARILY STRATEGIC TIME TO DO IT. IT WAS TIME. AND GUESS WHAT? THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION DID A MIRACULOUS JOB RIDDING IRAQ FROM SADDAM'S REGIME, LOSING LESS THEN, WHAT, LIKE 250 SOLDIERS? SAD, OF COURSE... BUT HOLY CRAP, FOR A WAR, THATS REALLY LOW!!!

But STILL!! I hear people, after i send them the link politely, RANTING AND RAVING about how they think Bush went to war with Iraq for oil...

CHECK THE DATABASES! OIL INTAKE FROM THE MIDDLE EAST SEVERELY DROPPED AFTER THE INVASION, AND RIGHT NOW, AMERICA ONLY RECIEVES 21% OF ITS OIL FROM THE ENTIRE MIDDLE EAST !!