We're about to find out what change really means....

[smillerdvm]

[QUOTE=Hew;
Sorry to split hairs, but when someone throws out statements of facts like, "in his first week Bush...." I just think think they/we have a good-faith obligation to make sure those facts are correct.[/QUOTE]

We know how accurate you are on your fact checking, and that you feel everyone has a....."good-faith obligation to make sure those facts are correct". I wished more of the neo-cons felt that way.
You can talk the talk on fact checking, now lets see if you can walk the walk

In view of your stated position , why haven't you reported back on the results of your fact checking on the "Should Bush be held accountable" thread?

[Captain Mike D]

We know how accurate you are on your fact checking, and that you feel everyone has a....."good-faith obligation to make sure those facts are correct". I wished more of the neo-cons felt that way.
You can talk the talk on fact checking, now lets see if you can walk the walk

In view of your stated position , why haven't you reported back on the results of your fact checking on the "Should Bush be held accountable" thread?

If you are going to call Hew out on that question then I would ask you-- Why has not a single Lefty commented on the TWO threads regarding our new Sec. of the Treasury??
How about Hillary's conflicts of interest?

[Hew]

I wished more of the neo-cons felt that way.

LOL. Open the windows in your office and let it air out some, doc, I think somebody left the lid off the flea dip. I wish you knew what a neo-con actually was other than a fun name to call someone.

PS...feel free to bring that thread back up to the top with your moveon.org-inspired blockbuster revelation. I already asked you once to explain where I was wrong and you passed...I honestly don't give you much more thought than that.

[JDogger]

I wish you knew what a neo-con actually was other than a fun name to call someone.

Well...its a pretty broad term...just google it. Whats it mean to you? I know what it means to me.

Whats a liberal? Lots to google there too. I don't expect to lose any sleep because its a fun name to call someone as well.

JD

[paul young]

i have to ask Duckhead when the head of al-quaida in Yemen was released.

i have a hard time believing it was in the last week. and if it wasn't, how is that Obamas fault?

i can see what Obama's in for over the next 4 years........-Paul

[Matt McKenzie]

i have to ask Duckhead when the head of al-quaida in Yemen was released.

i have a hard time believing it was in the last week. and if it wasn't, how is that Obamas fault?

i can see what Obama's in for over the next 4 years........-Paul

I suspect he's in for the same kind of treatment that President Bush got for the last 8. Like Bush, he will abandon his base on many key issues but will certainly not win any friends on the right. He'll find himself in the middle with his approval ratings in the dumps waiting on historical perspective to determine his effectiveness. He will be a huge disappointment to the far left and a nemesis to the far right. His years in the position will age him horribly and when it's time to go, he will welcome the relief. Let's just hope he manages to do something positive during that time.

[paul young]

Luvmylabs,

it certainly is your decision whether you and your dogs respond to future emergencies. i just would ask you to question your motives before making that decision.-Paul

[YardleyLabs]

...

And as you've noted, "barely more than 60 days" is a far cry from "in the first week."

Sorry to split hairs, but when someone throws out statements of facts like, "in his first week Bush...." I just think think they/we have a good-faith obligation to make sure those facts are correct.

I will admit to a certain amount of hyperbole in my statements. However, for someone who freely calls others Marxists when you disagree with their policies -- with no ideological or factual basis beyond prejudice -- and who bristles at being called a neo-con, your focus on detail is a little misplaced. It's similar to your argument that my calling the missile defense system "an abysmal failure" is misguided because of the success of Aegis in close in defense of ships when there have been no successful tests of the missile defense system proposed for Poland that involved any form of sophisticated countermeasures even when Aegis has been used for tracking. The one "near" success was when the countermeasures failed to deploy.

My point, as you noted in your original response, was that each President can be expected to make his (or her) mark on the job and to further the agenda that got them elected in the first place.

[Hew]

Well...its a pretty broad term...just google it. Whats it mean to you? I know what it means to me.

If it has become a pretty broad term it is only because it has been mis-applied so often and seems to be the catch-all pejorative for lots of folks. It is nearly universally accepted that neo-conservatism is related to foreign policy beliefs; not economics, not domestic policy, not social issues,...but foreign policy. So in a discussion about some generic topic when somebody blurts out something along the lines of, "I wish neo-cons would tell the truth," it outs them (to me, anyway) as a moonbat who regurgitates.

Whats a liberal? Lots to google there too. I don't expect to lose any sleep because its a fun name to call someone as well.

Sure, ask 100 people what a liberal or conservative is and you'll get 100 different answers. But neo-conservatism is much narrower. Not all conservatives are neo-cons any more than all liberals are pacifists.

[Hew]

I will admit to a certain amount of hyperbole in my statements. However, for someone who freely calls others Marxists when you disagree with their policies -- with no ideological or factual basis beyond prejudice --

That's patent horsesh!t. A search of "Hew" and "Marxist" will yield you a grand total of two posts of mine. TWO. Here they are:

I've never said Obama's a socialist or a marxist,...

Call it whatever you want, but the notions you put forth in your first post were entirely Marxist...from the notion that the accumulation of excess wealth is bad to the notion that wealth accumulation must naturally come at the expense of others...straight outta "Das Kapital."

More of your "hyperbole" I guess?

and who bristles at being called a neo-con,

I don't bristle at being called a neo-con. I bristle at dim bulbs who don't know what a neo-con is calling me a neo-con.

It's similar to your argument that my calling the missile defense system "an abysmal failure" is misguided because of the success of Aegis in close in defense of ships when there have been no successful tests of the missile defense system proposed for Poland that involved any form of sophisticated countermeasures even when Aegis has been used for tracking. The one "near" success was when the countermeasures failed to deploy.

LOL. You and the smiller guy carry some baggage around with you. Feel free to bring that thread back up to the top and we'll discuss...including your above mischaracterization of what I wrote.