I prefer the neo-cons. They tend to be more moderate on domestic policy and in general more knowledgable and thoughtful on policy. Even on foreign policy, the neo-con's scary point, Tea Partiers are worse. They either tend toward neo-isolationism or some bizarre evangelical hawkishness. Neo-cons, as much as I didn't appreciate them at the time, even as they started wars I didn't agree with, treated the people we are at war with as human beings, valued the protection of civilians (to an extent; we are talking relative to Tea Partiers), and continued on to nation-building and stabilization after taking out governments. All in all, neo-cons are more liberal. And more sane. Except Bill Kristol. He's a hack.
More like 12 years. I'm just curious to see if the lefties would really prefer folks like Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfeld so long as the government isn't reduced.
I think its two words for the same group of people. I can't tell the difference between them and I have been a conservative my whole life.
Neocons tend toward authoritarian right-wing policies and a crony-capitalist free-market approach to economics: the Tea Party tends toward libertarian right-wing policies and a dismantling of as much government as possible because they actually want a real free market economy. I hope that clears up the divide for you, Devil's Advocate.
I understand that is what the tea part claims, but i don't believe it. look at the top politicians in the tea party and i bet you find a neocon.
True. I guess I prefer the serial killer who won't torture me first... unfortunately I think both of these groups are okay with torture too!
