There is an interesting op-ed piece on the Wall Street Journal Website. Here's the first paragraph to whet your appetite and hopefully you'll click on the link to read the rest.
Last week Pat Buchanan appeared on Comedy Central's "The Daily Show," and liberal host Jon Stewart bonded with his paleoconservative guest over their mutual opposition to the liberation of Iraq. Mr. Stewart smiled and nodded while Mr. Buchanan derided "neoconservatives" four times in the course of the six-minute interview. In his efforts to promote his and his guest's common agenda, Mr. Stewart didn't ask Mr. Buchanan what he meant by "neoconservatives." It was clear that the Jewish Mr. Stewart didn't realize that Mr. Buchanan was using what has become an epithet for "Jews"--an epithet employed most often by the left.
I was aware of the pejorative association of "neocon" with "Jewish conservative" and can see the original intent of using "neocon" to describe former liberals who have seen the light. However I usually employ it the same way as mentioned in the article: as an "interventionist Republican". In this way, I've been thinking of *myself* as a neocon, albeit one who is Catholic and sympathizes with traditionalist Catholic agitprop. I flatter myself to see myself in the company of Kristol, Perle, Krauthammer, et al. I am glad to associate myself with them and continue to think of myself as a neocon.