[MineralMan]

"This is commentary on "the traditional conservative agenda lies in ruins," which the author feels can be directly placed at the feet of President Bush.
"

I disagree. The article is Bush-bashing, pure and simple. As I said in a later message, I'm not a big fan of many of Bush's policies. However, nothing good will come of this sort of crap. Unless you are a liberal, of course, in which case, splitting the right is a very good idea.

Is that the desired result? If it's not, then the anti-Bush rhetoric from the right needs to be toned down considerably and converted to supportive, but constructive criticism.

What I'm seeing is tons of sheer pique on the part of the most conservative portions of the GOP. That bodes ill for 2006 AND 2008.

[Conservative Coulter Fan]

You have an irrational argument, because this isn't "bashing." This is a very reasoned, articulate bit of commentary with a very serious point as opposed to something that attacks Bush over his performance at Yale, suggests he has dyslexia, or something that would be appropriately listed as "Bush bashing."

You say yourself, I'm no fan of Bush's policies, but that hardly tells me anything and besides...how can you support him but not his policies? This is about uniting conservatives on principle, not party, and advocating a more conservative form of government, unless you are a liberal and nejoy being able to write Bush's education bill outspending Clinton/Gore with the largest spending increase in history while attacking the republicans for not spending enough...I think liberals are quite happy with this arrangement.

[Alia]

Your post was a breath of fresh air. The article is nothing more than Bush Bashing. It is not careful analysis in the book, either. It is not balanced analysis.

Conservatives stand for Principles and so does President Bush. Some conservatives stand only for "idea" principles and little else. And they routinely cut off their noses to spite their faces. It's romanticism which gets in their way, IMHO.

I've always held the view that in fact, males are far more romantic (in the classic meaning of the word) than are females.

And Bandow and Bartlett have come off as "women scorned".

[Politicalmom]

What would be the point of "supportive, constructive criticism"?

Bush just does what he wants and to heck with everyone else.
He simply will NOT enforce the law, which is what he is supposed to be doing.

The Senate is completely ignoring what they are being told by a HUGE majority of their constituents.

I have NEVER sat home for an election, and I certainly won't for the next one, because I am THRILLED with Georgia's government, and want them to stay in power. If Republicans don't show some responsiveness to the PEOPLE and demonstrate some courage, I will simply not vote in the Federal election, or will find someone who I can vote FOR instead of having to vote for the lesser of two evils.

I have had ENOUGH, I have reached the end of my patience. I will not keep hoping that MAYBE the Republicans will actually ACT on what they say they believe.