by Jack Hunter
One of the defining features of neoconservatism is to never revisit glaring mistakes or re-examine gross misinformation for anything pertaining to America's wars. To this day, neoconservative guru Norman Podhoretz will swear that there were WMDs in Iraq and The Weekly Standard's Bill Kristol has no problem with writers on his staff who made laughable links between Saddam Hussein and Al-Quada, but has zero tolerance for any conservative who dares to question war as a practical matter.
Simply put - neoconservatives are defined entirely by their foreign policy position, namely their endless willingness to wage and rationalize any and all American wars. Small government? Neocons aren't interested. Global empire? Bring it on.
South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham is a neoconservative Republican who maintains and defends the Bush administration's Iraq war narrative to an embarrassing extreme. There's nothing remotely traditonally conservative about Graham, who was a major proponent of 2007's McCain/Kennedy amnesty bill, supported and promoted the TARP bailout and now even suggests nationalizing banks.
To the neocons credit, they have never pretended to be for small government because they realize the promotion and maintenance of a global American empire requires a massive domestic state to support it. Not surprisingly, Graham has been a career-long, big government Republican and unrepentant champion of the Iraq war; both defining characteristics of neoconservatism.
A letter in today's Post & Courier doesn't used the word "neocon" or "neoconservative," but recognizes the sheer lunacy of Graham's position:
Graham on war
I'm saddened at Sen. Lindsey Graham's recent comments at the S.C. Republican Convention. His still strong advocacy for the Iraq war, which has now been fully exposed as being fundamentally wrong in that none of the reasons given for the war have been substantiated, resonates with a chilling tone.
There have been no weapons of mass destruction found nor have there been any links found between Sept. 11 and Saddam Hussein. It's a bit shameful to be yelling pro-Iraq war rhetoric from 2003 six years later in 2009.
How is anyone supposed to respect the opinion and judgment of someone who can't accept the veracity of a subject because it conflicts with his previous stance on it? A quality of a good leader is being able to acknowledge when he has been wrong. Whether it's a political ploy to keep good face with the Republican party or just plain stubbornness, South Carolina deserves better representation.