Neo-Cain?

Herman Cain's gaffe claiming he's not familiar with the "neoconservative movement" has already sowed widespread doubts about his fitness for the office of President.

This is ironic, because Cain's self-professed ignorance shed accidental light on at least one truth: There's no such thing as the neoconservative "movement." In fact, neoconservatism itself has changed so much over the years, and has had its definitions so muddied by distortion both intentional and otherwise, that it's not clear whether anyone is really familiar with what neoconservatism is today.

This confusion of terms is partially the result of political fallout surrounding the Bush administration. While the second Bush did embody many items on the neoconservative wish list, some liberals took this fact to mean that all the things they hated were all the things neoconservatives like. The result is that everyone from Fox News to the Koch Brothers to the Christian Right has been labeled as "neocons."

However, the vast majority of people who were originally thought of as "neocons" had the label applied against their will as a derogatory word by more liberal critics who accused these former fellow travelers of having betrayed them. In other words, "neocon" used to be the Democratic equivalent of "RINO." And this site's editorial stance notwithstanding, no one would ever claim there was such a thing as a RINO movement.

So while Herman Cain might have shown ignorance with his answer, he also accidentally hit on a basic truth. It is a gaffe similar to Sarah Palin's "In what respect, Charlie?" answer when she was questioned about the Bush doctrine. Herman Cain might not be familiar with the neoconservative movement, just as Palin didn't know what the Bush doctrine was, but when you got right down to it, most of the media and the electorate is confused about what these terms mean as well.