Divided and Demoralized?

Once again, the New York Times reveals how detached the liberal elitists are from reality.

Drudge reports on what the Times has in store for readers on Sunday.

BUSH HOPES FOR FRESH START
Sat Oct 29 2005 12:08:08 ET

More than nine troubled months after taking the oath of office and in the wake of the indictment of a senior administration official, President Bush will try to give his second term a fresh start by naming a new nominee to the Supreme Court, intensifying his drive to cut government spending and continuing to speak more bluntly about the threat from Islamic fundamentalism, the NEW YORK TIMES reports on Sunday.

The administration's goal was to reassure its divided and demoralized conservative base, chalk up a few victories on Capitol Hill and set the stage for a more robust comeback next year after months that have seen one misstep and setback after another.

I do not sense that conservatives are divided or demoralized, not at all.

I understand why lib propaganda outlets like the Times want to believe that's the case. They worked tirelessly to divide and demoralize conservatives ever since Americans elected Bush. They have sought to undermine the Bush administration by twisting the truth and manipulating facts. They don't care about the impact their misinformation has on our country or our troops. They are driven solely by their anti-Bush agenda, hoping to rip the conservative power base apart.

I think the Times confuses the Bush administration with the conservative movement.

Problems for Bush don't necessarily translate into problems that would divide or demoralize conservatives. I thought these libs are supposed to be so intelligent. Why are they incapable of making that distinction? It's probably just wishful thinking on their part that conservatives are disintegrating.

The libs hoped this week would be the final nail in the conservative movement's coffin. Miers withdrawing her nomination, 2000 dead in Iraq, and the indictment of Libby were to be the cue to sound the death knell for conservatives.

WRONG!

I think conservatives are more energized than ever as a result of the lib media being in full drool mode for weeks, months. There is great optimism that Bush's next choice for the Supreme Court will be a better reflection of the principles that conservatives have fought so hard for.

Moreover, forcing Scooter Libby to resign in no way alters the power of the conservative movement. Even forcing Cheney or Bush to resign would not impact the movement because the movement is not about individuals. Its strength is derived from the shared principles of conservatives. That philosophy is what propelled individuals into office, giving Republicans control of the House, Senate, and Presidency.

In other words, Bush, the House, and the Senate don't give conservatives power. Conservatives give them power.

The Miers nomination and her eventual withdrawal certainly should have clarified that for the libs.

Furthermore, if Libby is found guilty of committing a crime, which I doubt, that would be a reflection on Libby's character alone, not the state of the conservative moment.

No division or demoralization here.

The libs just don't get it.

Shared principles and ideals drive the conservative moment. It's bigger than any one individual. Taking out a White House aide doesn't touch the millions of people in the ranks of the movement. Their commitment is to a philosophy, not a person.

Elsewhere in the Old Gray Lady, the dueling columnists: Frank Rick, who claims, special counsel Fitzgerald fills in a piece of the puzzle; while David Brooks maintains: Democrats make the facts fit the conspiracy theory.

It's hard to comment on this little blurb from Drudge, but generally speaking:

David Brooks makes sense.

Frank Rich is clinically delusional.

The Old Gray Lady is senile.