Conservatives, as absent minded as their president when it comes to the lessons of history, are forgetting a significant cyclical aspect of the history of the Iraq war in their hearty hosannas over the “success” of the surge.

But Shaun, not all conservatives support the president’s foreign policy. Liberalism and conservatism are not defined by an allegiance toward a particular party but toward a particular set of beliefs. And there are some conservatives out there who have argued that Bush’s foreign policy is not in any way conservative. Afterall, nation building was considered to be “liberal” when President Clinton was doing it.

Let’s not forget that Ron Paul, the most fiscally conservative member of Congress was one of the earliest and most outspoken critics of the Iraq War. How are anti-war liberals and anti-war conservatives to unite when anti-war liberals tar all conservatives with the same brush?

I would borrow from retorts when people complain about FOX news. Change the channel, if you don’t like it.
What’s good for the goose…..

Sounds like something Coulter would write. I’m a big fan of Shaun’s but I think AR has a point. Aside from that do think a lot of folks who think the surge is working need to be reminded that we’ve seen similar successes before that proved to be totally hallow, and I really don’t see any indicators that point to this being any different. Time as always, will tell.

In the spirit of Joe’s request to such responses, I will do so.
should read:
In the spirit of Joe’s request to stop such responses, I will do so.

And three “the’s” in a row? Poor editing, what can a say.

Re: my comment in ‘The Future’ thread

He uses inflammatory and derogatory language in his top-level posts and commentaries, and invites ‘rough-and-tumble’ discourse as a result.

Your post:

Conservatives, as absent minded as their president when it comes to the lessons of history

This is another example of the smearing and tarring of entire groups (not just the President, who certainly falls into the public figure category of fair game) that is typical of how you start you posts, and makes it hard to both try and reasonably listen to your point of view, and respond without lowering the discourse to the level you have set.

I for one will admit to allowing myself to be goaded by your rhetoric, and responding with comments directed personally towards you that were inappropriate. In the spirit of Joe’s request to such responses, I will do so.

But is it too much to ask that you in kind limit your attacks to the public figures and polices in question that you have a problem with, and not lash out vitriolically at those that simply have a different viewpoint than yours? to give credence to the the the possibility that perhaps we think the way we do not out of ignorance, malice, hatred, greed, racism, etc., but because we do believe that our way of thinking leads to better results for all?

In short, are you willing to do your part to help make TMV a place for more civil discourse again?

Congress better be prepared to ask these tough questions in September. $50 billion won’t be the last request; nor, of course, is it the first. What’s the end game here?