The Corner on National Review Online: "1. The discussion so far has largely focused on electoral politics. I confess that I am pretty indifferent to Republican fortunes at this point. "
It's actually kind of a shame, since I actually agree, at least with the broard brush-strokes of her overall argument that one can be "conservative" without basing it on religion.
But the italicized section is just too stupid to go uncommented. What she's saying is that, whatever she thinks about Bush et al, she doesn't think it would be any better with, say, Russ Feingold and Chriss Dodd in charge.
Honest to God, would you people focus? This might actually be important.