Response

"While the major networks may be dominated by unacknowledged liberal bias, I don’t think the country is populated by a majority blind to that bias." You may be right on that, but I've got a strong feeling that the number of folks out there who don't keep track of politics as religiously as I do and simply take the mainstream media's word with no reservations is extremely high. Otherwise, we wouldn't be seeing the sort of public opinion polls that we regularly see. For example, when Democrats made hay about Bush "increasing" the levels of arsenic in the water, Bush's approval rating on the environment went down. Could this be a conscious and rational response? Sure. Is it more likely just a gut reaction to the headlines and opening story segments that Americans were watching? I think that's more likely.

"But when you imply that right wing pundits are waging war on some kind of grand liberal conspiracy to silence conservative views, some contrary facts must be acknowledged." No, there's no "conspiracy" to "silence" conservative views. Liberal institutions are pushing their own values, sometimes consciously, and I'm sure that sometimes the actors in those institutions aren't even aware of the inherent bias. Indeed, I expect liberal institutions to promote agendas they find compatible with their own views. The problem, as I stated earlier, is that they are unwilling to acknowledge that.

On whether or not conservatives are the "resistance," I must respectfully disagree. Republicans may control the government, but I would say that conservative ideas are not dominant in D.C. During the Reagan administration, conservative ideas were definitely the driving force of the executive branch. The same could be said of Congress right after 1994 when the "Young Turks" sought to revolutionize government. We saw some success in both those periods. But don't kid yourself; for every one step forward we took, the liberals had already pushed us two steps back.

The current administration and Congress no doubt have some conservative leanings and even the spine to advance a conservative principle from time to time. But the desire to remain in power has prodded both to abandon many conservative principles. That's how we ended up with the Medicare bill and the current squabble over just how much pork we can possibly pack into the Highway bill. Political necessity? Perhaps. There's certainly some merit to the argument that we need to stay in power to block the even worse harm that liberals would bring. (Of course, I think if Republicans had the spine to defend, promote, and explain conservative principles, the American people would agree with them...but that leads us back to the media and the ability to actually get those ideas out to the people.)

The bottom line is that while conservatives, conservative sympathizers, and some worthless tagalongs (a certain Senator from PA might fit in this category) may be running the government, they're still fighting a rear guard action. Liberals are succeeding in continually pushing us to the left, even if we occassionally push them back a bit. NR may have it right in that conservatives are "standing athwart history, yelling 'Stop.'" Can we ever win, in a fight like this, where we give more ground than we take? It didn't work for Joe Johnston, but I think that it can be done. If we're ever able to push through even a partial privatization of Social Security, then I think that we'll have reached a level of parity with liberals. Once you crack the foundation of the nanny-state, it may just begin to crumble. Then, and only then, will conservatives no longer be the "resistance."

"The vast majority of his judicial appointments have been approved." True...except where it counts. Only 13 out of 33 Appellate nominations have been confirmed.

"You're right that it is a constant struggle, and it will continue - but "war"?" Yeah, war. The liberals are treating it as such, and you'd make a grave mistake not to do the same.