"Emmanuel Gustin" wrote in message
...
"Kevin Brooks" wrote in message
...

Name the "neoconservatives" that occupy *any* *key* positions. Please.
Time
to put your money where your (overworked) mouth is.

It is of course pretty hard to judge what people's real opinions
are, and there is no such thing as a "neo-conservative party."
Some people described as neo-conservatives even prefer to
deny that there is such a thing at all, which does not make it
any easier.

However, fortunately there is Kristol's "Project for a New
American Century", which is as close to a formal neo-con
organisation as one is likely to get. The people who signed
the "manifesto" of the PNAC are the closest we have to
"card-carrying neo-conservatives", and they include
Rumsfeld, Cheney and Wolfowitz. Other signatures are,
interestingly enough, those of Quayle, Fukuyama and Kagan,
and that of Jeb Bush; but not that of George Bush.

It is unlikely that many woukld really classify Cheney, or for that matter
Rumsfeld, as "neoconservatives", especially as both have been plain ol'
conservatives for many, many years. Wolfowitz is not what I would call in a
"key position" in Bush's cabinet (he is not a cabinet level official in the
first place).


It is true that "core" neocons such as Wolfowitz, Feith, Bolton,
and Armitage, are not really in the top posts;

Thanks--then you admit spoke incorrectly when you alluded to so many "key
positions" being in the hands of "neoconservatives".

Brooks

but considering
the left-wing background (and relative youth) of many neocons
that does not come as a surprise. Neocon "converts" who
always have been loyal party men as well have the best cards
in this administration.

Other neocons are of course not really interested in active
politics, retired (Kirkpatrick) or discredited (Perle).

Probably Condoleezza Rice should also be considered
a neocon, despite her occasional support for Powell.

--
Emmanuel Gustin