[CWOJackson]

Not to discrete his effort but the author does an outstanding job of laying bare many of the Paleocons in their own words and deeds. I think I'll stick with him.

[KC Burke]

I guess my point is Chief, the article cites particulars in the eighties as precipitating this, names instances and individuals and in general increases the acrimony.

This is truly misleading in that the splits, divisions, peaceful alliances and the like go back to shortly after WWII, and that doesn't even account for the issues with the Southern Agrarians twenty years prior.

This means that the reader is misled, if he doesn't know the history. I don't mind that it takes a side. I don't mind that it gets personal as to individuals and instances. I do mind if it pretends that these individuals and instances precipitated a great division and misleads the reader.