As far as the discussion of neo-cons, I was using the generally accepted grouping often bandied about here. Frankly, it doesn't make much difference to me.
However, Kristol's opinion (exagerrated by Newsmax) is what prompted much of this discussion, and since the administration is accused of allowing people like Kristol to drive policy (not true) some discussion of his history was in order.
Sorry if you felt I was off-topic.
Good question... because you wrote to me? And because you seemed to think your comments about Kristol had something to do with "neocons"?
As far as the discussion of neo-cons, I was using the generally accepted grouping often bandied about here.
I know, but I don't accept that grouping, because it is used neither consistently nor comprehensibly. I can't find two different Freepers who agree fully on what a "neo-con" is.
I do know, however, that it is supposed to have something to do with being a former socialist who has converted to conservatism. How that is supposed to relate to Bill Kristol still stumps me (which is why I asked).
Sorry if you felt I was off-topic.
I didn't. I'm sorry you got that impression.