I’m not usually bowled over by the depth of The New York Times‘s understanding of conservatives or conservatism, but even I was flabbergasted by the delusion of this gem from today’s edition:
As much as Iraq or health care or any other issue, the question of how to deal with President Bush is vexing the Republican field. Do they embrace him as a means of appealing to the conservative voters who tend to decide Republican primaries?
Embrace Bush as a means of appealing to conservatives? Which “conservatives” have they interviewed? On which planet?
Conservatives are overwhelmingly dissatisfied with the president, for a host of reasons, including his disregard for Constitutional protections, his support for liberal candidates and appointees, and his expansion of the federal government and its power.
Are Times reporters really so out of touch that they don’t realize the depth of conservative antipathy toward President Bush? Or are they just trying, despite the truth, to tie conservative principles to an administration that undermined itself by rejecting them?