And another column (a rather long one) that goes through exactly how Bush is a lying liar (based on his speech last night). I presume conservatives will continue to buy into Bush's nutcase version of reality, although, to be fair, not all do so. As I mentioned, George Will doesn't seem to buy a shred of it, but Charles Krauthammer is still drinking the Kool-Aid.

This makes me wonder about something: What is it about conservatives that make them "follow the leader" right over a cliff (metaphorically speaking)? I mean, if Bush declared Canada Enemy #1 and threw them into the "axis of evil", would conservatives jump on board? When it comes to Iraq, it isn't just the lack of evidence for Bush's version of reality that's bothersome -- it's the complete evidence to the contrary that is so disturbing. So back to my question: Why do conservatives not engage in a little critical thinking on this issue? Clearly, between conservatives and liberals, authoritarianism is not balanced equally across the spectrum (and, no, I'm not going to go to the extremes of Communism and Nazism -- they're the extremes that prove the saying "Opposite extremes produce like effects". I am merely looking at the American liberals and conservatives, who, in the grand scheme of things, actually fall in a relatively narrow part of the spectrum). Does that explain it? Are conservatives just, on average, more enamored of authoritarianism and, thus, more willing to accept the "commander-in-chief"'s claims? Certainly, they didn't mind using the argument that we shouldn't question the commander-in-chief during a war back in the 2004 presidential campaign.

I also feel quite safe saying that liberals are, on average, less enamored of authoritarianism. Frequently, conservatives make fun of liberals for having so many different directions. The presidential primary system is famous for having the Republican Party come up with one guy early on, while the Democrats go in a million different directions, listening to no one in particular. This election season may be a bit unusual in that respect.

Could this explanation really be it? I hope not. It's a bit disturbing because it suggests that these guys still supporting Bush don't think. I wonder if they've ever thought a thought in their entire lives -- certainly, they've never thought one that requires any sort of critical thinking.