The article discusses the two basic interpretations conservatives have about the Bush years, as well as the characteristics Bush and Palin share. One side sees those years as a vindication of neocon philosophy; the other sees Bush as a failure. The writing needed to be more incisive, more to the point.

It's an interesting story that provides useful information and insight. I wish I could say that it imparted surprising insight into Republican-think, some suggestion that they grasp why they lost the election. Maybe if the writer had cast his net farther? Maybe not.

While I thought this was well argued and supported, it would have been more balanced if Chait had included some information on why the women he describes were dancing on tables at the mention of Palin's name. Otherwise, folks who don't will never understand the rift.

The story paints the radical regressives still drinking and marketing the same Kool-aid. Reality based has never been the strength of the GOP, and the article shows that facet again.

Thoughtful and fearless.