One Is Not Necessarily The Other, Pt.2 (extra link added)

In my archives of 11/23/04, you'll find my rap about (basically) pigeonholing liberals-conservatives-democrats-republicans-etc., and the folly of same. Now, I seem to find more information demonstrating my point that the conservatives were betrayed by the neocons, who are not true conservatives, nor do they represent conservative values or interests. I offer as an example The American Conservative. Click on their "about us" tab to see what they are about. And here is an interesting interview with their executive editor.

I might not agree with everything they have to say, but they are anti-war and anti-bush, and that marks a dramatic departure from neocon thought. Their anti-bush sentiments include both foreign and domestic policy issues. They even endorsed Kerry for president because, even though they are conservative, they are so disillusioned with Bush's failures as president. They criticize the neocon foreign policy "...where America threatens and bombs one nation after another, while the world looks on in increasing horror." They go on to state:

We believe conservatism to be the most natural political tendency, rooted in man's taste for the familiar, for family, for faith in God. We believe that true conservatism has a predisposition for the institutions and mores that exist. So much of what passes for contemporary conservatism is wedded to a kind of radicalism--fantasies of global hegemony, the hubristic notion of America as a universal nation for all the world's peoples, a hyperglobal economy. In combination with an increasingly unveiled contempt for America's long-standing allies, this is more a recipe for disaster. Against it, we take our stand.

The description of conservatism as "man's taste for the familiar" is really the textbook definition of conservatism and there's nothing wrong with that. In a live-and-let-live world, liberals like me have no problem with people who "like things the way they are," as long neither of us tries to force our beliefs on the other, or deny the other their rights. In fact, a nation of cooperating, live-and-let-live, left-and-right, checks-and-balances ideologies who respect each others' rights and opinions would be a very successful one indeed, for all concerned... even liberals like me.

And hold the phone! Here is something I never, ever, thought I would hear myself say: I actually agree with Pat Buchanan in this article, a totally great condemnation of Bush's warmongering. Who would have thought? The guy is right on the money on this one. Maybe there is a light at the end of the tunnel...