[NB: Edit at 7:30 to change phrasing of second option from “It’s not required, but it does correlate” to “It’s not required, but they are connected”]
Discuss.
Search
Archive Calendar
| M | T | W | T | F | S | S |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | ||||
| 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 |
| 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 |
| 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 |
| 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | |
Archives
Categories
- A Government That Can Force You to Buy Health Insurance Can Make You Do Anything (3)
- a protein wisdom philosophy primer (3)
- academics (25)
- armadillo (8)
- Friday Fiction 100 Word Challenge (51)
- from the protein wisdom conceptual series (136)
- identity politics (33)
- If Republicans Win the Senate in 2014 (1)
- in which celebraties comment on current events (67)
- language / intentionalism (88)
- legal (6)
- My brief conversations with inanimate objects (130)
- NSA / FISA (46)
- One Term to Serve, the 2012 Revival (6)
- Overheard in a Fallujah bunker (27)
- Poems from 196x, Revised by the Ghost of Richard Brauti (27)
- protein wisdom's DNC coverage (30)
- protein wisdom's RNC coverage (29)
- protein wisdom: the movie Lists (20)
- Provocateurism (16)
- real-time empirical observations (51)
- red pills found behind the sofa cushions (42)
- Scenes from my driveway (61)
- Talking back to 80s music (41)
- The Martha Stewart Chronicles (58)
- The protein wisdom interviews (10)
- The protein wisdom original poems (142)
- Uncategorized (20,046)
- Zen and the art of motorcycle maintenance, abridged (34)
Recent Comments
- In The Mailbox: 02.28.23 (Afternoon Edition) : The Other McCain on Hey, longtime pw readers…
- In The Mailbox: 12.23.22 : The Other McCain on Patrick J. Carroll truly IS a sad, embittered psychopath
- Danger on Patrick J. Carroll might be a psychopath
- Danger on Patrick J. Carroll might be a psychopath
- In The Mailbox: 07.18.22 : The Other McCain on Patrick J. Carroll might be a psychopath
I thought neocons meant “Joooooooos”.
Speaking from the outside, as a socially conservative non-Neocon, does not being a Neocon automatically mean I am a Paleocon? ‘Cause I’m not.
Reminds me of the time in 6th grade in LA when another kid asked me if I was a Surfer or a Low-Rider. I was, and continue to remain, neither.
I use Neocon on my plum trees for asian beetles. Takes about 6 cans.
I can’t worry about being a Neocon right now. I was just informed that Munsingwear shirts with the little penguins on them are now back in style. Were they out of style????
I hate being traumatized like this so early in the morning.
Neocon – the shortest review possible for Matrix III.
Seriously, the social-con rap on neo-cons is that they aren’t social-cons. Why isn’t Richard Perle out there yelling about abortion?
On the other hand, maybe that’s just the paleo-con wing of the social-cons.
I will give up my smut when they pry it from my warm sticky fingers.
OK, slogan needs work…
GMG: ok, ewww.
I thought “neocon” was pinko speak for “I hate Bush.”
Hey BRD: Fascinating difference in the poll numbers here and at MPJ. I’ve only recently started reading My Pet Jawa regularly so can you please speculate on the possible cause?
MTR –
I put the post up there as well, to sort of check out a couple of things on the political landscape. I ran both of these up as part of thinking about a question I’ve been mulling over for a few weeks about deterrence, nuclear terrorism, and how we will respond nationally. I would like to run additional parallel polls at a couple of sites, to flesh out the data.
At this point, the Jawa poll has only been up for a few minutes, so I’m inclined to wait a bit to see how numbers settle out before I start speculating.
I have a few theories, but I’m also interested in seeing how this plays out in the comments before I commit to anything.
BRD
Guess that shows you how new I am to The Jawa Report, that I used MPJ instead of TJR!
/n00b
What does “Socially Conservative” mean? Shy, kind of awkward at parties?
A staid insistence on wearing pants.
Chances are if you’re a neocon you subscribe to the whole social Darwinist, you’re-on-your-own society, borrow and spend agenda of the Republican party too. If you don’t and want to have any influence at all you’d best hide those views.
But nobody ever asks Paul Wolfowitz or Michael Ledeen about privatizing Social Security, health care accounts or abortion. Maybe they should. Might be subjects they actually know something about. They sure don’t know much about foreign policy or even human nature for that matter.
Yeah, that’s why so many sat on their hands last election.
MarkG8,
Given your comment, what, in your mind, distinguishes Neocons from traditional Republicans?
BRD
Is a Necon similar to a Neocon?
*police52*
Well, at least the word wasn’t *spelling-nazi52*
BRD I’d say GHW Bush isn’t a neocon, GW Bush is.
The difference? Neocons seem to have a bent to go off on wild unrealistic military adventures thinking we can remake the world at the point of a gun. Look at the amount of money we’re spending on the GWOT this year. Over $500 billion. The amount the State Dept. has for winning hearts and minds & democracy promotion? About $157 MILLION. That’s million with an “M”.
Spread of democracy = social darwinism?
Hunh. Who knew?
Responses to Terrorism:
Liberal – It’s our fault.
Conservative – Didn’t we buy off the Saudi’s?
Neocon – Attack the biggest problems first, then we’ll, umm…
Social Darwinism was, originally, a “progressive” platform. More importantly, it’s not a part of the Republican or conservative philosophy.
Having gotten such an essential element wrong, there’s no need to read the rest of your screed.
$157 million? Where you getting that number?
Social conservative==opposed to Porky-Pigging. Check.
The machinery of war is expensive, MarkG8, whereas talk is cheap. Hyperbole aside, be sure to let us know the first time one of the Striped Pants Boys from Foggy Bottom actually talks a terrorist to death.
I am absolutely a Neo-con, and I am absolutely socially Liberal.
Fiscally, I’m to the right of Atilla the Hun, and see where that’s gotten me.
I doubt it.
It’s actually worse than that BRD:
http://tinyurl.com/yqlkr5
MarkG8,
Counting one program from one Department to compare against the entire budget of another Department is…
Well, let’s just say that it’s not even quite as close as an apples and oranges comparison.
Moreover, to imply that one program at State represents the totality of non-DoD spending on the GWOT is also a wee bit off base.
Thirdly, to imply that all DoD spending is intended for “wild unrealistic military adventures thinking we can remake the world at the point of a gun” and cannot be DoD spending focused on “winning hearts and minds & democracy promotion” represents an equally myopic interpretation forced on to existing data.
Now, I’m sure that you can go and actually dig up more substantive numbers, and by all means could have bolstered your actual point and argument (let’s say by looking at the difference in Defense and State budgets as totals, or outlays for specific programs) and made a cogent cost-benefit analysis argument.
Yet you chose reflexively to make your point this way.
Why?
BRD
BRD
Robert Crawford the Republican agenda seems to be to “starve the beast” of the US government so it can be “shrunken to a size it can be drowned in the bathtub”. Those are Grover Norquist quotes.
There apparently isn’t a government regulation, program or a tax outside of the military they don’t oppose or won’t screw up to make it appear useless.
The health savings account tax dodge for the wealthy is a cruel joke for average wage earners. Privatizing Social Security would lead us back the days when the elderly were a dirt poor demographic. Massive tax cuts for the wealthy put the $9 trillion dollar debt on future generations. It’s pampering of the wealthiest 1% – not survival of the fittest – at the expense of everybody else from 2001 forward and it equals social darwinisim.
It’s a big reason why people are disgusted with Republicans or haven’t you noticed?
BRD why don’t you do it? You need the enlightening not me.
Lessee, Neocons…aren’t they the ones who’ve managed to splinter the Republican party on their watch, lost by wide margins the last election (something about spending money that wasn’t theirs, or even from this country) and, to top those estimable feats, have given ground on all the social issues that matter to Conservatives?
Now, not that I would dig up Reagan and prop him up a la El Cid, but I would welcome Thompson Campeador….
look59 yeah, born about then…but, you know, things don’t necessarily improve with generational turnover. Just ask R. Agustus…
Damn good idea.
MarkG8,
I’m beat. I’m tired. Today was a nice and easy 11-hour day, and it looks like I may have an entire day off this weekend – a big step up from the last month or so – hell, I didn’t even have to sleep at the office today. So, I apologize for not rising to the bait, and calling you out when you’ve managed to lose your point on the way to the argument and made some sort of blog comment that’s, frankly, way beneath the level at which you’re capable representing yourself in political debate.
So, where to start?
First of all the Department of State budget 2007FY request is approx $9.5 billion, of which you cited a $157.5 million dollar request. Now, as you note, the DoD budget is about $500 billion. However, in your ongoing paean to hysteria you couldn’t simply address the simple question posited in the post by noting that the DoD has a overall budget roughly fifty times larger than that of State. Nope, you had to play your righteous anger card and chose something that is, very roughly 3% of State’s total budget, because you’re just so damn sure that you – unlike anyone else in the history of the bloody universe – has all of the answers.
There are elements to be discussed, the role of hearts and minds in the broad spectrum of reconciling hard and soft power approaches to grand strategy. Where things like that sit in the government today, where they should sit, and how to make the pieces work together. But, really, I should expect as much from someone who responds to a question about semantics by assigning a set of beliefs to someone based off of zero evidence and your almighty untouchable purity of simplistic arrogance. Far be it from me to hope that someone’s aspiration to understand a situation might measure up to a tenth of their wish to just be an ass. I guess I’m the damned fool who might have possibly thought that multi-year studies, like the Beyond Goldwater-Nichols initiative could have entered your mental horizon. Or, perhaps, the notion that the extension of the traditional four phase model of conflict could or should be added to with a Phase 0 and/or Phase 5, would be worth noting.
Hell, I don’t even expect every guy on the street to be up to speed on this, but I had, evidently, foolishly, hoped that you and those like you might shut up and sit down long enough to actually discuss issues.
Far it be it from me to suggest – three times in the same thread – that you figure out a basic, fundamental lesson you’re going to have to get your tiny, little pinhead around at some point if you ever have any intention of being a contribution to a democratic society. But, since I’m so enamored with the merits of Democracy – even for the poor brown people of Iraq, I’ll give you a freebie:
Just because someone else doesn’t come to the same, wonderfully pure conclusion that you do doesn’t mean that they’re arguing in bad faith, that their logic is faulty, that they care less than you, or that their information is worse than yours. Hell, it’s entirely possible, THAT THEY MIGHT MIGHT EVEN HAVE A POINT. But based on your charge to the ramparts that there’s anything that deviates from your Revealed Wisdom on Life, The Universe, And Everything, I wish I were more surprised at your lack of… nuance.
I mean, honest to God, I spend far too much time screwing around in threads, trying, for the love of God to actually keep the flame of discourse alive. Of course I’m not perfect, but dammit, I’m making an Actual Serious Grownup Effort to try to engage.
And what do I get for the trouble?
BRD: Yet you chose reflexiveIf ly to make your point this way. Why?
MarkG8: BRD why don’t you do it? You need the enlightening not me.
I ask you a question about your choice of methodology, and your response has all the maturity and relevance of rubbing mashed peas in your hair.
If you are even the slightest bit representative of any non-trivial segment of the electorate, we’re screwed. You’re so damned intent on your self-righteous arrogance, that you’ll refuse to even Take The Time to explain to the rest of us poor unwashed sheeple why, perhaps, there might even be another valid set of tools with which to understand the world as it is.
What a sorry, sorry peace of work you are, and what a damned fool I’ve been for supposing that it could have ever been worth the effort to even think you would stoop to conversation with your fellow citizens.
Good DAY, sir!