[vulturesrow]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Jack, you have to understand that Cyrus has a specialized form of M.U.B.S. (Monsters Under the Bed Synodrom) known as N.U.B.S. Neo-cons, the term which he bandies about so lightly, are responsible for every ill imaginable. You'll get used his particular form of inanity if you keep reading this forum long enough.


[/ QUOTE ]

I have noticed this here, and in many other forums. Everyone is focused on "neo-conservatives." I think a lot of people have no idea where the term comes from and what it means. There are certainly differences on many foreign policy questions between neo-cons and more tradition cons, (sometimes referred to as paleo-cons) but when talking about obesity, I had a hard time seeing the revelance of talking about neo-cons.

So your answer makes a lot of sense. Did you happen to read Jim Lampley's ranting about Ohio on the HuffingtonPost? He went on and on about how there was a massive neo-conservative conspiracy to steal the election in Ohio. Byron York of the National Review responded by saying, "Can you explain the difference between the conservative and the neo-conservative position on Ohio?" So that is now my response when I hear people misuse the term. I just substitute the issue at hand for the word "Ohio."

[/ QUOTE ]

I basically view it as a form of intellectual laziness. Neo-conservatism now is much different from when it was first envisioned. Most people think that neo-conservatives are united on foreign policy issues but this isnt even the case. Its basically become a slur, much like the term liberal is used among the right. I myself have been guilty of this from time to time but I do try to avoid it. Also, generalizing is sometimes a useful tool in debate. However the consistency in which the term is misused is somewhat maddening to me.