What's new about neo-cons and neo-libs?

Listening to a rather dry interview with author of Running Commentary and his vapid explanation of how Jewish liberals became Neoconservatives.

The argument is that Jewish Conservatives are new to the movement and distinct from it.

New liberalism was the catalyst for the split because of it's differences with classic socialism.

However both of these positions lack depth.

Conservatives welcome what Jewish intellectuals add in terms of analysis and theory. Of course simple participation in the cause is strong enough.

When have liberals been something other than statists? What this preceding view of liberalism demonstrates is that Reagan Democrats, Blue-Dog Democrats became disillusioned. It is not the ideology that changed but the truthful understanding of people that changed.

Financial Blackmail is no different

Loan money in bad loans or we will shut you down.

Push product to hit sales quota or we will fire you.

Avoid paying the full tax burden or we will break you.

Lie to me or I will despise you.

These are the same use of authority and positional power.

One person makes a losing game for another person out of an existential threat.

Fear the Boom and Bust

Check out this crash course in economic philosophy - for more depth check out Commanding Heights from the BBC - below

What cannot science know... quite a bit

Powerful defense of God and Deism generally, this is taken from the 1998 debate between Craig and Atkins.

There is no business school anymore

I'd like to know what the educational background is of the executive staff in The Fortune 100 companies.  I can guarantee that education outside of liberal schools represents less than 5%, maybe less than 3%.  I bet that 99.9% have a BS/BA, most from left leaning institutions.  Many will have MBAs from "top tier" business schools - HBS, Wharton, etc.  Some may even have doctorate level degrees in related fields.  

Have we ever stopped to think about what type of employee these schools are creating?  I can guarantee you that the degrees and education these students have received do not produce capitalist entrepreneurs.  These employees are activists, they are not really even business men and women.  Oh yes, they perform the day to day operations and are held accountable for profit and loss, however their view of the company and the country are not one of independence and autonomy from the government.  It is one of Corporate Social Responsibility and Public and Private Interdependence.  

These are not people who seek to confront government control of industry in favor of free market liberty.  They agree with socialism in principle and will bow to the wishes of government. They have been given their positions of power in industry presisely for this reason.  

Why?  Because they have been taught this.  These men and women have been indoctrinated. They are not individuals, they are members of a group: the elite club of Ivy Leauge and Bush Leauge schools - the best of brightest of the dimmest and dumbest we have to offer.  

What is the definition of Failure?

Gibbs reply: Do they Republicans want to see the president's economy fail?  (read: to reporters, ask Republicans denounce Rush Limbaugh).  Obama does not have an economic policy, he has a government policy.  We want his government policy to fail.  In order for the economy to succeed the government must get its money grubbing hands off of it.  Since when does the government control the economy!?  We've accepted this premise for far to long.  

Hubris is my, Middle Name

Barack H. Obama, Hubris on display.  This leader of ours is demonstrating an amazing self destructive streak that is akin to cliff diving or playing chicken.