I've come to understand over the past few months that so-called "paleoconservatives" are people with whom I have a good deal (though not everything) in common. Frankly, I probably have more "paleo" visitors to this blog (as a scan through the blog roll will show) than those from just about any other identifiable group. I once had major concerns about the "paleo" movement, but many of them have been alleviated by my regular "paleo" visitors here. The militancy of a couple of "paleo" adherents had once led me to hold a rather dim view of the group, but I'm learning that this handful is probably not representative, which I think is fortunate for me and for paleoconservatism.

Interestingly, one of the more rabid, self-identified "paleoconservatives" who visits here on a regular basis (and who greatly contributed to my original antipathy for the movement as a whole) says that Alan Keyes, while articulate, is a "neocon" to whom we should not listen. Thus proving that "neocon" is a stupid term which has ceased to have any useful meaning in public discourse.

As a "neocon," Keyes wants to abolish the federal income tax, government welfare, the Federal Reserve system, and opposes increased involvement in the U.N., and favors educational choice and keeping the the federal judiciary out of state business (like in the Alabama case).

And here's what Keyes has to say on issues relating to the recent Iraq war:

I would want to renounce the idea that we have the right to interfere, in an aggressive way, with the affairs of other [nations]. I think we can play a constructive role in trying to bring about diplomatic solutions in different parts of the world, but I do not believe that when our ideas are rejected, we should resort to war in order to force people to accept a deal that's dictated on our terms.

Yeah, that's some "neocon."

As we now know, "neocon" only means "someone who doesn't agree with me on every single jot and tittle of minutia." We are now free to completely ignore the term and regard it as merely a subjective fit of petulance on the part of the user.