In response to:

Democrats Fib Again About Israel

Bondman60 Wrote: Sep 11, 2012 12:52 PM
IMO, the wars were fought more like peace corps missions than wars, and that was a mistake. But think about this for a while: Where would be today had we not responded with military force to 9-11? Nobody can know, but sometimes, wars save more lives than they cost. Only fanatical Leftists deny that truth.
loadstar Wrote: Sep 11, 2012 5:09 PM
Hey, pal, THEY dubbed themselves neo-CONservatives!

Irving Kristol, former socialist, leftist Jew, founded the movement.

NeoCONS deride those like me who are America First "Paleocons" in their eyes...people like Pat Buchanan who believe in picking wars carefully/wisely, but fight like hell to win if you must go in!
Jay Wye Wrote: Sep 11, 2012 4:49 PM
people who use the term "neocon" have no credibility.
loadstar Wrote: Sep 11, 2012 3:54 PM
"Only fanatical Leftists deny that truth."


Horse puckey! I am the son of a career Air Force Colonel and SAC Airborne Commander.
It is NOT liberal to oppose stupid, profligate wars!

The neoCONS simply glommed onto conservatism (as the wind blew with R.R.) to get the influence they wanted for Israel!

Dubya was encircled by these many names would you like?! Feith, Perle, Wolfy, Eliot Abrams, Libby, Bolton, Wurmser, Fleischer, Frum...THEY got us into Iraq, and had called for it YEARS BEFORE 9/11! Hell, they tried to sell Slick Willie on it back in '98!
Last week saw a dispute over Jerusalem at the Democratic National Convention that, in the context of similar incidents, provides an important insight into the party's covert distancing itself from Israel.

The story broke on Sept. 4, when the Washington Free Beacon reported that "Jerusalem is unmentioned" in the 2012 Democratic Party platform. This made news because, since it became U.S. law in 1995 that "Jerusalem should be recognized as the capital of the State of Israel," every platform of both major U.S. parties has reiterated this point. The...