1. neoconservatives are/turned out to be big govt big spending overseas interventions republicans. Their group was founded by the fathers of todays neocons. Their fathers and the founders of the movement had been democrat socialists.
see wikipedia...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoconservatism
The term "neoconservative" was popularized in the United States during 1973 by Socialist leader Michael Harrington, who used the term to define Daniel Bell, Daniel Patrick Moynihan, and Irving Kristol, whose ideologies differed from Harrington's.[7]
The "neoconservative" label was used by Irving Kristol in his 1979 article "Confessions of a True, Self-Confessed 'Neoconservative.'"[8] His ideas have been influential since the 1950s, when he co-founded and edited the magazine Encounter.[9] Another source was Norman Podhoretz, editor of the magazine Commentary from 1960 to 1995. By 1982 Podhoretz was terming himself a neoconservative, in a New York Times Magazine article titled "The Neoconservative Anguish over Reagan's Foreign Policy".[10][11] During the late 1970s and early 1980s, the neoconservatives considered that liberalism had failed and "no longer knew what it was talking about," according to E. J. Dionne.[12]
The term "neoconservative", which was used originally by a socialist to criticize the politics of Social Democrats, USA,[13] has since 1980 been used as a criticism against proponents of American modern liberalism who had become slightly more conservative[8][14]
The term "neoconservative" was the subject of increased media coverage during the presidency of George W. Bush,[15][16] with particular emphasis on a perceived neoconservative influence on American foreign policy, as part of the Bush Doctrine.[17] The term "neocon" is often used as pejorative in this context.[citation neede
Quote from piezoe:
"You can always tell who is liberal and fixated on the role of government. They always want the government to 'do something'."
That's a human characteristic of the naive you are referring to. It applies to naive people of most political persuasions. And you are certainly incorrect when you say 'you can always tell who is liberal'. You can't always tell.
And not only that, but consider that individuals have different ideas of what "liberal" means. In U.S. politics, the term has become nearly useless. As an example of how nebulous the term "liberal" has become, you will use the term liberal to describe someone you don't agree with because you consider yourself a conservative. At the same time, however, you may fit well the classical meaning of 'liberal'.
Liberal and Libertarianism have the same roots and yet today what we call neo-conservative is often closely associated with libertarianism. All of these labels are used as terms of derision so imprecisely that outside of academic discussion they have become largely useless when used by themselves to describe an individual's political philosophy.
The unqualified, imprecise use of political labels in the Politics and Religion Forum is at the root of many misunderstandings and pointless insults.
2. Which brings me to my next point.
Liberals today are big govt progressives. Progressing towards socialism / communism... big govt low liberty.
Classical liberals are anti big govt pro - pro big liberty and very similar to Libertarians.
Classical Liberals and Libertarians are the opposite of modern day liberals and neo cons.
The only confusion is that the democrats were once classical liberals who believed in big liberty... see miranda rights and privacy laws. It is confusing that such a good history could have been so quickly changed in to a big socialist / facist party.
With establishment republicans very closely tied to them via their crony donors / owners.
