The right wing of the Republican Party that so embracing the so-called "neo-cons" cannot embrace McCain and if he were not the nominee I doubt anyone would even think of calling him such. I am not a big fan of McCain bit McCain has come across the aisle on countless occaisions, something people like Lott, Bush, Graham and countless other would never consider.
Support or don't support whatever your wills desire but at least attempt to characterize the candidates correctly based on the records---would you say McCain's immigration position was that of a "neo-con". While others would chose to except some picture that America is "beaten, bruised,suffering,and destitute" I for one will continue to teach my children just how wonderful and proud I am of this nation and ALL of its people regardless of political ideology. As a Virginian I have always placed more faith in our people than our government and believe traditonally that has always been embedded in our core beliefs as Virginians and Americans for that matter. We should never air our disdain for another Party in power no matter how arrogant or foolish as a reflection on OUR country as such characterization does injustice to ALL Amercians.
A President or Executive is representative of the politics and not the people as a matter of course and while we find countless examples of things in this Executive that may go against our core beliefs or thoughts, it (the power) is still not a reflection of real America and never has been.
We are not a beaten nation but a very proud one in collective terms. Only in such a nation could we see the waves of change sweeping States like Virginia. Only in a true Democracy could we witness such a shift in ideology in such a state as Virginia. Maybe that is the light at the end of the tunnel you may wish to see.

refers only to foreign policy -- it has no bearing on the immigration debate nor on McCain's previous stances on campaign finance, Bush's tax cuts, profligate spending, or any other hot button issue (except for civil liberties, in an ancillary but important manner).

McCain is absolutely a neo-con -- he believes in using war as the primary tool of foreign policy, to eschew containment strategies for a militaristic confrontational posture that inevitably leads to more wars. McCain has yet to meet a war he would not engage in -- he's advocated for bombing/attacking any/all of Iran, Syria, and a number of other countries. Why in the world do you think Bill Kristol and his house-organ, the Weekly Standard, the 'intellectual' elevator music to the neo-con movement, supported John McCain in 2000 over GWBush?

This election is most visibly about differences in foreign policy -- continued utopian 'neo-con' fantasies of how the world operates, versus a return to a more humble, restrained, and confident view of how American soft power can be used.

Calling McCain what he is is an important part of the effort to defeat this PoV in November.

has become this all-purpose word used to describe Republicans, when really it only has meaning in a foreign policy context (as a sort of neo-Wilsonianism, aka "make the world safe for Democracy")?  As far as I can tell, McCain is more of a mainstream internationalist and multilateralist than Bush and Cheney, but still gung-ho about Iraq.  

I don't see much maintstream about that! :)

but who knows.

McCain is a foreign policy utopian, as much as any of the extremists like John Bolton who are advising him.

He'll fix his eyes on an enemy and pound them with every bit of firepower while calling those who oppose the action traitors.  With Bolton and Lieberman in tow, McCain is preparing for 4 more years of Bush foreign policy.

Remember the Romans and the British and the Persians, they all thought God wouldn't let their countries fall either.  But the greatest economic truth is that neither money nor power give a red damn about our constitution, it's the creative destruction of economics and history at play.  Without solid leadership and wisdom there's nothing standing between America and 2nd class nation status.  In socio-economic terms we're already much more like Brazil or Mexico than we were 8 years ago.

McCain provides more of the same ignorance and arrogance that have sent America spiraling downwards for the last 8 years.

Don't play semantics when the future of the greatest nation in the history of the earth is at stake.  

McCain's idiocy is a threat to America's future.

If your defined context of "neo-con" by which I suppose you mean neoconservative why then is it back when my parents left the Democrats liberal camp after the turmoil of the 60's and moved to the center by which which then many called the right , they were called "neoconservative"? Liberals shifting allegiances and moving in the Reagan camp and those that said in late 70's "I did not leave the Democratic Party, the Democratic Party left me" were also coined as "neoconservatives" by the ones they left behind. In that context I do not think foriegn policy was a factor, but then since you contend that the immigration debate has little to do with foriegn policy and security there is little doubt where you stand on diplomacy issues.
And by the way if there is a nation whoses "future...is at stake" in the next twenty years it very well may be the state of Isreal and not the United States given what some seem to be endorsing as future foriegn policy platforms. This of course has always been the premise why any platform endorsing immediate withdrawal of Iraq is and always has been simply a political ploy appeasing elements within the Party base and if you are able to connect the dots with statements from folks that were once in the Obama camp (ie the BBC comments) or the Clinton camp and even the advisors to McCain this is easily identified if one attempts to put analyze the positions versus the statements (or hedging).
I became convinced of this when comparing the transcripts from the September 2007 meeting with Petreaus and the ones this week. The strong, almost combative stance seems to have dissipated in terms of the rhetoric. IE....maybe no more "suspension of disbelief" tone.

McCain calling for 100 years of occupation in Iraq is worse than Bush's "stay the course" nonsense.  He is embracing this conflict full tilt, and want to continue to fund this corrupt enterprise with the blood of our soldiers.  Voting for McCain is just more of the same.  I hope this country wakes up for the 2008 Election.