I split this as it was getting off topic. 

Carry on ladies and Gentlemen.

Quote from: Shooterman on December 15, 2012, 01:48:59 PM
I am glad you're here, Dude, but a small word of advice, if I may. Let this be a learning experience for you. Some of these guys are pretty strong in their thinking, slipping of the track occasionally as we all do. Also keep in mind, some of these folks are tougher than anything you experienced on CF. They'll rip you heart out if you get too far out of line. To hold your own, you will have to be tough.

I don't mean this in an ugly or condescending way, but some of these bozos I have posted with for years.

Especially watch that damned old rooster.

That's Mr Bozo you old curmudgeon . Welcome to the forum Dude.

Quote from: Solar on December 15, 2012, 03:56:20 PM
I'm glad you think so, it was by design. It was a planned effort to bring the greatest posters on the web together, a place where they wouldn't have to deal with kids, or the BS that entails.
It's also why I booted that one idiot lib roboposter, (can't remember his name) he never made that much of an impression, he'd just post leftist talking points and refuse to back them up.
Then when challenged, would complain unfairness or that so and so never gets challenged.

It's crap like that, that has a very negative effect on a quality forum. If you've ever looked at our stats, we are the go to forum for facts, half million views per month.
That means that people are coming here for real arguments supporting their position and returning to facebook or some lib forum to do battle, we are the ammo bringer^TM, so to speak. 

The greatest posters on the web?

Damn..............I'm just an a**hole.

Speaking of which....................Paladin is yet another that is living in an alternate universe. His responses had nothing to do with what I posted. I had to kick the little bitch to the curb. Sorry.

Quote from: kramarat on December 15, 2012, 07:46:56 PM
The greatest posters on the web?

Damn..............I'm just an a**hole.

Speaking of which....................Paladin is yet another that is living in an alternate universe. His responses had nothing to do with what I posted. I had to kick the little bitch to the curb. Sorry.

No prob, though I quit reading his books long ago.

Quote from: Solar on December 15, 2012, 08:02:00 PM
No prob, though I quit reading his books long ago.

I never knew that homosexuality led to keyboard fever.

Quote from: Shooterman on December 15, 2012, 04:01:47 PM
The problem is they don't like being called Neo-Cons. One old fart ( older than I and Rooster ) says Neo-Con is anti-Semitic and there is no such thing. Of course, he is a Bill Buckley Neo-Con.

Wow!! now that is old.      

Quote from: Indy on December 15, 2012, 05:01:41 PM
That's Mr Bozo you old curmudgeon . Welcome to the forum Dude.

Indy!!!

Quote from: kramarat on December 15, 2012, 07:46:56 PM
The greatest posters on the web?

Damn..............I'm just an a**hole.

Speaking of which....................Paladin is yet another that is living in an alternate universe. His responses had nothing to do with what I posted. I had to kick the little bitch to the curb. Sorry.

Paladin's posts/replies were so like the ones I grew to hate on other forums.  I've been trying to place him with another poster from goupstate.com forum because the replies from each sounded like they were coming from the same poster(troll).

Take a bow, Kramarat!  We don't need liberal, marxist, commie, activist BSers around.

Also, I was on several forums and am hearing a term here that I'm not familiar with.
Someone give me this forum's definition of a "neo-Con" and thanx ahead for not asking me which bush I've been hiding behind. 

Quote from: keyboarder on December 16, 2012, 04:44:38 AM
Paladin's posts/replies were so like the ones I grew to hate on other forums.  I've been trying to place him with another poster from goupstate.com forum because the replies from each sounded like they were coming from the same poster(troll).

Take a bow, Kramarat!  We don't need liberal, marxist, commie, activist BSers around.

Also, I was on several forums and am hearing a term here that I'm not familiar with.
Someone give me this forum's definition of a "neo-Con" and thanx ahead for not asking me which bush I've been hiding behind. 

I don't mind sparring with libs. It's when they enter an entirely different world, that I can't deal with. His last post had me calling gays child molesters. Huh? I never came even close to saying anything of the sort. I can't talk to someone that's going to invent my side of the conversation.

I always thought neo-con meant extreme, (possibly religious), right wing conservative. Just an assumption though. I never looked it up.

Quote from: keyboarder on December 16, 2012, 04:44:38 AM
Paladin's posts/replies were so like the ones I grew to hate on other forums.  I've been trying to place him with another poster from goupstate.com forum because the replies from each sounded like they were coming from the same poster(troll).

Take a bow, Kramarat!  We don't need liberal, marxist, commie, activist BSers around.

Also, I was on several forums and am hearing a term here that I'm not familiar with.
Someone give me this forum's definition of a "neo-Con" and thanx ahead for not asking me which bush I've been hiding behind. 

Neocon generally refers to Pubs such as Bush and he=is dad, McCain, Olympia Snow even Bloomberg.
They claim yet they cave, they are guided by a twisted morality, they have no problem promoting war for profit, but will quickly vote against the death penalty on religious grounds.
They are the RINO of the party, they are Boehnor and they need removed from the party, surgically, if necessary.

Quote from: keyboarder on December 16, 2012, 04:44:38 AM
Paladin's posts/replies were so like the ones I grew to hate on other forums.  I've been trying to place him with another poster from goupstate.com forum because the replies from each sounded like they were coming from the same poster(troll).

Take a bow, Kramarat!  We don't need liberal, marxist, commie, activist BSers around.

Also, I was on several forums and am hearing a term here that I'm not familiar with.
Someone give me this forum's definition of a "neo-Con" and thanx ahead for not asking me which bush I've been hiding behind. 

Damn, KB, which bush have you been hiding behind? 

This is more or less a compilation of things I have read over the years.

If I may indulge for a moment; Irving Kristol, I had thought more or less coined the word Neo-Con or neoconservative, i.e. one that was basically new to conservatism. Mostly it goes back to the old Scoop Jackson ( Senator ) Democrats that advocated making the world safe for democracy by engaging in operations throughout the world. In effect it was to protect Israel, or at least a number of Jewish folks jumped on the bandwagon, and truly came to power during Ronnie Reagan's days. He somewhat disappointed them, I believe, when he brought our Marines home after the murder of 200+ in Lebanon. G H W Bush allowed them to regain a foothold and send us to Iraq and Kuwait. ( truly none of our business if one reads the history of the region ) They were somewhat thwarted during Clinton's time as he was busy with his own little brush wars. Bush Two gave them much more influence, and they finally had their chance to engage our military in useless, unproductive wars.

I know it's wiki, but it's kind of an interesting read on neocon.............

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoconservatism

This is part of the problem. There are many definitions of a neocon.  A lot use it as a weapon to silence support for the only real democracy in the Middle East (as you can see by some of the posts already).  That's why I'd be leery of anyone who throws that term around, but still, the use of that term has different meaning to different people.

We have promised to protect those nations that share our values, including Israel, Britain, Twain etc.  It's in our NATIONAL INTEREST to protect those who share our values and heritage.  It's why we didn't let Europe fall to Nazism or Communism. It's why when any nation asked for support from the Soviet Union, we did what we could. Yet the people who HATE Israel only complain that we insert ourselves in the politics of the Middle East. They believe the violent and bloody Muslims would love us if we only sacrificed Israel to the alligator.  They never say that about Twain.  They only complain about foreign aid to Israel, but NEVER about foreign aid to the Arab nations that are at war with us.

A lot of this "neocon" BS is just Israel HATE masquerading as "conservatism."

There are some REALLY bad people out there. Isolationism isn't the answer. But if we NEED to go to war, fighting them the way we've been doing it isn't either. 

Here's a good article on the topic:  http://www.cato-unbound.org/2011/03/07/c-bradley-thompson/neoconservatism-unmasked/

Quote from: Yawn on December 16, 2012, 07:58:16 AM
This is part of the problem. There are many definitions of a neocon.  A lot use it as a weapon to silence support for the only real democracy in the Middle East (as you can see by some of the posts already).  That's why I'd be leery of anyone who throws that term around, but still, the use of that term has different meaning to different people.

We have promised to protect those nations that share our values, including Israel, Britain, Twain etc.  It's in our NATIONAL INTEREST to protect those who share our values and heritage.  It's why we didn't let Europe fall to Nazism or Communism. It's why when any nation asked for support from the Soviet Union, we did what we could. Yet the people who HATE Israel only complain that we insert ourselves in the politics of the Middle East. They believe the violent and bloody Muslims would love us if we only sacrificed Israel to the alligator.  They never say that about Twain.  They only complain about foreign aid to Israel, but NEVER about foreign aid to the Arab nations that are at war with us.

A lot of this "neocon" BS is just Israel HATE masquerading as "conservatism."

There are some REALLY bad people out there. Isolationism isn't the answer. But if we NEED to go to war, fighting them the way we've been doing it isn't either. 

Here's a good article on the topic:  http://www.cato-unbound.org/2011/03/07/c-bradley-thompson/neoconservatism-unmasked/

I certainly am not sure where all of that shit came from, but it seems to be a universal trait of 'Good Guy Republicanism'. Let's save the world because by doing so, we'll save us. Never mind that it is a far cry from 'defending the homeland' to defending the homeland of assholes that would think no more of  reciprocating in kind than of taking a shit.

It is immoral to borrow money to defend people of another nation, while we travel farther into the quagmire of destroying our country. It is dmned sure unconstitutional, as well.

As for me, I don't hate Israel- let them survive as long as they can. ( today's Israel is a far cry from the Old Testament Israel ) I do abhor this uncanny ability we have of putting the bastards on some ungodly pedestal.

Understanding the word Neo (meaning New) will go along way in understanding the term Neocon.

Take Neocolonialism:
Control by a powerful country of its former colonies (or other less developed countries) by economic pressures.

Bush fits the term Neocon, as well as his dad.