I appreciate your offer, and might take you up on it, if I have time. I'll be just as happy if someone else does. I'm not even certain how critical or not you've been, I haven't read any of your posts in awhile.

I think it's pretty clear I wasn't offering my services as all-purpose message vetter: I stated that some pro-Bush posters and likely some pro-Kerry ones (quite possibly myself, especially when I first started posting) 1.) were exceptionally critical of anything that could be interpreted as a contradiction, change of mind, etc., and 2.) probably weren't so perfect themselves. I never claimed no one had a right to criticize, just as I have a right to say some criticize in a fashion that makes me more likely, not less, to support their target. Like the Press Secretary's statement on the topic issue: that Kerry must name names, or he's lying. Makes sense, unless he's not lying, in which case he'd lose whatever faith he had among foreign leaders by outing the opinion we'd generally suspect them to have anyway.

Sorry if I offended you my assertion that (gasp!) some people are more partisan than perfect. I wanted to remind people here not to cast the first stone and that BOTH SIDES should not always act as little independent mud slinging spin machines attacking a candidate- unless they're on payroll. Perhaps I should have been more politic and said I was certain that some Kerry supporters were as rabidly nit-picking, but I generally skip those posts- I'll readily admit to not correcting overly rabid allies in public, but I don't listen to them until they calm down.

However I think you might have misinterpreted my intent as nothing more than a partisan attack, next time we're arguing a point, I'll try to remember your offer- although I'm not sure I can be as critical as some are in turning everything but a verbatim repeat of the same statement into a flip-flop. I assume you misread my post and are not claiming to be one of the few who will tear into any Kerry quote, regardless of context?